# Allow only (x) consecutive replies in the same topic
**URL:** https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756
**Category:** Feature
**Tags:** completed
**Created:** [9월 10, 2017, 4:31오후 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756 "2017-09-10T16:31:17Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@dax](https://meta.discourse.org/u/dax)
#### Post date: [9월 10, 2017, 4:31오후 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/1 "2017-09-10T16:31:17Z")
I am often (too often) in the situation of having to merge more than one user’s consecutive replies and I often find myself responding “this is a forum, not a chat 😡, don’t hit the reply button each row you write”.
This is a bad behavior in a forum and I would personally prefer if users were allowed a number of consecutive replies limited by site settings or category settings (at least up to TL 3).
In this way users are forced **to learn how to use forum tools properly** , leaving the moderators free to do much more useful work.
A user trying to respond consecutively the second, third or fourth time will see a pop up that say
_“No more than x consecutive replies are allowed. Edit your previous reply instead or wait for someone to answer you”_.
Note that `newuser max replies per topic` and `sequential replies threshold` are different site settings from what I have proposed.
The first is specific only to new users (and not for consecutive replies), the second shows only a warning but does not prevent the publication of consecutive replies.
EDIT: maybe a setting by category rather than a global site setting could be much more useful.
---
### Author:  [@jcoates](https://meta.discourse.org/u/jcoates)
#### Post date: [9월 11, 2017, 12:35오전 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/2 "2017-09-11T00:35:06Z")
You would probably want to allow consecutive replies to different people. For example… [Handling trolls with multiple accounts over VPNs - #5 by codinghorror](https://meta.discourse.org/t/handling-trolls-with-multiple-accounts-over-vpns/49489/5)
---
### Author:  [@nixie](https://meta.discourse.org/u/nixie)
#### Post date: [9월 11, 2017, 1:25오전 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/3 "2017-09-11T01:25:39Z")
I completely agree with @dax
This is going to be an excellent feature - if implemented.
My discourse site is for “Students” and a good percentage of folks post messages as if they are on chat. And one of the tasks that keep the mods busy in my site is “merging consecutive posts”. So, if this feature as proposed by @dax is implemented its going to be awesome.
---
### Author:  [@sam](https://meta.discourse.org/u/sam)
#### Post date: [9월 2, 2018, 11:00오후 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/4 "2018-09-02T23:00:59Z")
Perhaps we just add a very simple site setting that forces people to edit last post IF last post is still editable and owned by them. Apply only to topics, not messages.
This can be opt in per site. It would be very safe and have no terrible fail modes where last post is no longer editable and mods keep on getting contacted via flags.
@codinghorror should we slot something for 2.2?
---
### Author:  [@codinghorror](https://meta.discourse.org/u/codinghorror)
#### Post date: [9월 3, 2018, 2:42오전 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/5 "2018-09-03T02:42:27Z")
Yeah I do think this would be a useful setting. I will add to 2.2 release topic.
---
### Author:  [@tophee](https://meta.discourse.org/u/tophee)
#### Post date: [9월 3, 2018, 6:55오전 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/6 "2018-09-03T06:55:11Z")
> [@sam](#):
>
> very simple site setting that forces people to edit last post IF last post is still editable and owned by them
Would it complicate things a lot to check if the last x posts are owned by the user?
My thinking is that it sometimes does make sense to post a second consecutive reply, e.g. when it’s important that a message/notification gets sent out or where you reply to two different aspects of the topics and want to make it easier for the topic to be split.
---
### Author:  [@merefield](https://meta.discourse.org/u/merefield)
#### Post date: [9월 3, 2018, 7:08오전 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/7 "2018-09-03T07:08:04Z")
Could we design it so you can’t reply to the Topic more than X times but this is not enforced if you reply to individual posts explicitly using the individual posts’ reply buttons?
That would be a good compromise, no?
Part of the justification would be that splitting up a single post by quoting individuals is a lot more complex a task for a new user than simply hitting the reply button of each post you wish to respond to. It’s also much more tricky to quote from multiple posts on mobile.
I see many justified cases of users replying individually to several different people in a row.
---
### Author:  [@sam](https://meta.discourse.org/u/sam)
#### Post date: [9월 3, 2018, 7:11오전 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/8 "2018-09-03T07:11:04Z")
> [@tophee](#):
>
> My thinking is that it sometimes does make sense to post a second consecutive reply, e.g. when it’s important that a message/notification gets sent out or where you reply to two different aspects of the topics and want to make it easier for the topic to be split.
I don’t really agree with this being a default on setting, I think it is optional and highly targeted at specific communities.
I think making this too flexible here is not ideal for a few reasons.
Say we add a setting for `max_consecutive_replies` and tie that to `trust_level` we would totally lock off certain responses once the edit window is over, this is a pretty harsh default.
Renaming the setting to `max_consecutive_replies_unless_outside_of_edit_window` is going to be a nightmare to communicate.
I prefer to keep this very simple for now… a setting for “if user can edit last post, make them edit the last post”, default off.
---
### Author:  [@tophee](https://meta.discourse.org/u/tophee)
#### Post date: [9월 3, 2018, 8:09오전 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/9 "2018-09-03T08:09:10Z")
> [@sam](#):
>
> I don’t really agree with this being a default on setting
I didn’t mean to imply that it should be default on. My thinking was rather: if a specific community (e.g. the one @dax mentioned in the OP) decides they need to turn turn this on because of certain users, chances are it will affect the experienced/well behaved users negatively that they used before. The simplicity of the setting comes at a price, so I thought this could be solved by allowing x consecutive replies. Another possibility could be to enforce edit last post only for certain TLs or a specific group. (I didn’t understand this:
> [@sam](#):
>
> Say we add a setting for `max_consecutive_replies` and tie that to `trust_level` we would totally lock off certain responses once the edit window is over, this is a pretty harsh default.
)
---
### Author:  [@codinghorror](https://meta.discourse.org/u/codinghorror)
#### Post date: [10월 18, 2018, 12:35오전 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/10 "2018-10-18T00:35:59Z")
This is still scheduled for the 2.2 release!
---
### Author:  [@omarfilip](https://meta.discourse.org/u/omarfilip)
#### Post date: [10월 20, 2018, 6:31오후 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/11 "2018-10-20T18:31:47Z")
Would replies by email be exempt?
Use case: some members in our forum will reply by email in bursts (on the weekend, for example). They may reply to posts #1, #3, and #7, but their replies are added sequentially in the topic, i.e. #10, #11, and #12.
---
### Author:  [@codinghorror](https://meta.discourse.org/u/codinghorror)
#### Post date: [11월 21, 2018, 7:23오전 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/13 "2018-11-21T07:23:00Z")
This is now in and complete, default on with a value of 3, so it triggers on the \*\* fourth consecutive reply\*\*.
---
### Author:  [@danekhollas](https://meta.discourse.org/u/danekhollas)
#### Post date: [11월 21, 2018, 11:58오전 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/14 "2018-11-21T11:58:06Z")
> [@omarfilip](#):
>
> Would replies by email be exempt?
Is this supported? It is super annoying when a forum rejects the incomming email. 🙂
---
### Author:  [@codinghorror](https://meta.discourse.org/u/codinghorror)
#### Post date: [11월 21, 2018, 6:01오후 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/15 "2018-11-21T18:01:29Z")
Unlikely, since the same logic would apply. Feel free to modify the site setting as needed for your site.
---
### Author:  [@merefield](https://meta.discourse.org/u/merefield)
#### Post date: [11월 21, 2018, 6:08오후 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/16 "2018-11-21T18:08:44Z")
3 looks like a good default.
> [@dax](#):
>
> I am often (too often) in the situation of having to merge more than one user’s consecutive replies and I often find myself responding “this is a forum, not a chat 😡, don’t hit the reply button each row you write”.
I challenge this.
I actually encourage my users to post individual replies as these are easier to move. If a user (or I) merges replies to two or more different users you can end up with a post that you can’t split into a new Topic if they start to diverge in subject matter. One to keep an eye on.
---
### Author:  [@rizka](https://meta.discourse.org/u/rizka)
#### Post date: [12월 4, 2018, 9:49오후 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/17 "2018-12-04T21:49:32Z")
While translating I began wondering this:
> **No more than 1 reply is allowed.** Please edit your previous reply instead, or wait for someone to reply to you.
Shouldn’t this be something like “Consecutive replies aren’t allowed”?
---
### Author:  [@codinghorror](https://meta.discourse.org/u/codinghorror)
#### Post date: [12월 5, 2018, 12:36오전 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/18 "2018-12-05T00:36:16Z")
Yeah, I see your point, technically they are not consecutive _yet_ but they would be with the next one which is disallowed. So I’ll add that.
---
### Author:  [@exetico](https://meta.discourse.org/u/exetico)
#### Post date: [3월 27, 2020, 12:52오후 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/19 "2020-03-27T12:52:40Z")
이 기능을 조금만 확장해 주셨으면 합니다. 예를 들어, 모드/관리자가 카테고리별, 각 게시물별, 또는 신뢰도(trust level)에 따라 연속 답변 수를 정의할 수 있도록 하거나, 특정 사용자를 화이트리스트에 등록할 수 있도록 하는 것 말이죠.
이 작업을 위해 많은 시간이 필요할까요?
**예시/우리의 경우** :
_특정 주제에서 같은 사용자가 자주 게시물을 올립니다. 그런 경우에는 괜찮습니다. 하지만 한도에 도달하면 수정(edit)을 해야 하는 상황이 발생하죠. 그런데, 새 게시물을 작성하는 대신 마지막 게시물을 수정하도록 강제될 때, 다른 사용자에게 알림이 전송되지 않는 문제가 있습니다. 🙂_
---
### Author:  [@codinghorror](https://meta.discourse.org/u/codinghorror)
#### Post date: [3월 28, 2020, 2:46오전 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/20 "2020-03-28T02:46:25Z")
> [@exetico](#):
>
> 같은 사용자가 자주 게시하는 몇몇 주제들이 있습니다 - 그리고 거기서는 괜찮습니다
관리자 도구를 사용해 첫 번째 게시물을 대상으로 주제 소유자를 해당 사용자로 변경하세요. 주제 소유자는 이 규칙에 면제됩니다.
---
### Author:  [@exetico](https://meta.discourse.org/u/exetico)
#### Post date: [3월 28, 2020, 8:57오전 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756/21 "2020-03-28T08:57:07Z")
아, 그거 몰랐어요. 사실 그 사용자는 해당 토픽의 소유자였는데, 디스코스로 마이그레이션하기 전인지 후인지 확실하지 않아요. 그래서 일단 소유권을 제 계정으로 바꿨다가 다시 그 사용자에게 돌려놨어요. 예상대로 잘 작동하길 바랍니다.
팁 주셔서 감사합니다! 😄
[다음 페이지](https://meta.discourse.org/t/allow-only-x-consecutive-replies-in-the-same-topic/69756.md?page=2)