Moderator unable to move post to new topic when user has reached first day limit


A new user created the maximum number of topics on their first day (3) and then created a post in an older topic. As a moderator I attempted to move the post into its own topic and was unable to do so.

Steps to reproduce:

  1. Create new user
  2. Create maximum number of topics allowed on first day (3)
  3. Post in another (older) topic (post d)
  4. Log in as moderator and select the post d and use the wrench to move to new topic

Expected Results:

Post is moved to a new topic

Actual Results:

Unable to move post due to new user restrictions


Are there purposefully day 1 user restrictions in addition to the TL0 restrictions?



Discourse 1.5.0.beta8 (

System Information:

Windows 10 Pro, Chrome Stable 47


This seems correct to me, you were attempting to “help” that user circumvent new user limits :wink: for shame!

Remember that moved posts are owned by the users now when moved into a new topic, the topic is no longer owned by the mod who did the move, since that caused too much confusion.

And yes there are first day limits as well as TL0 limits, since if you know what you are doing you can get to TL1 in under 15 minutes…


I guess I was! I certainly agree with the decision to maintain the original poster as the owner of the post, and to that effect I understand why the restrictions still apply, however as I moderator if I want to move a post I should be able to do so regardless of who’s post it is! For example, I can move a non-moderator’s post into a closed topic, or a topic in a category they cannot even see/post in. Why is this restriction enforced and not the others?

Edit: @codinghorror, just to be clear, not requesting that those examples above start to be enforced, just inquiring about the difference.


Then create topic as you and reassign ownership to that user. That might work. Unclear why you are helping a new user circumvent new user limits. Would be better to either promote that user to TL1, raise first day new user topic limits for everyone, or similar…

Can’t do that, not an admin. BTW, why can’t mods reassign ownership of posts?

Because this new user has created multiple bug reports, and just like Meta, we only want one bug per topic. I am trying to make that happen, and now have to wait 8 hours for the restrictions to end.

Already reached TL1, and again, not an Admin, so no site settings changes.

I understand the restrictions on new users, I really do, particularly from a spam perspective, but again, this restriction is causing me (a mod) more work as I now have to remember to go back and more these posts (found 2 more since I create this topic) into their own topics 7 hours from now. This user isn’t intentionally trying to circumvent the limits…they are trying to be helpful by reporting bugs they find (as we want them to!).

Edit: More thoughts @codinghorror . To me the primary purpose of new user restrictions is anti-spam. Limit the damage that can be done - intentionally or unintentionally - by new users on the site. What is happening here is a well meaning new user is being blocked from continuing to do what was requested of him/her - report bugs found in game - and from the sound of it even a site admin doesn’t have an easy way to help this user (other than changing site settings or creating the post themselves). This just seems wrong. The user wants to help, but is being blocked from doing so. Unlike other restrictions (like TL0 1 image per post) I am powerless to remove the restrictions (up users TL) or help the user in any way.


So @SidV just posted a new support topic about this issue here. His issue was how to get around the new-user restrictions as an admin. As discussed previously in this thread, I have 2 primary thoughts on this issue.

  1. Admins/moderators should not be prevented from completing a staff action because it would violate a user’s rate-limiting. If I am staff on a site, and I want to move something, I should be able to move it, regardless of the user’s current status.
  2. Almost all restrictions on users can be removed by a mod/admin by increasing their TL. However, there is a apparently a separate first-day-user limit, and there does not appear to be a way to “excuse” a user from that setting. The suggestion to modify the site setting is not a good idea. Why should I increase the threshold for all first-day users (some of which could be spammers) when I should be able to just remove the restrictions from one user (who is following all the rules, being helpful, and prevented from continuing to do so…).

@codinghorror as you closed my topic, could you answer this? (please) :

@jomaxro do you know?

Sorry, I don’t understand what you wrote? It was closed since it was a duplicate of this.

@codinghorror suggested a workaround above. In my case they did not work as I am a moderator, not an admin…but if you are an admin this might work:

Unfortunately for the reason given above I have no idea if first-day user limits are a site setting or not…


OK, slightly different issue now, but same root cause. A new user (last 24 hours) has joined our site and posted a number of different bug reports and gameplay related questions. She sent me a PM after being unable to reply to my public post, due to a limit of 10 posts/3 topics. As discussed above, I can’t help the user get around this restriction.

Going to modify this feature request slightly: could there be a button on the admin page to “approve user” (or similar, I know user approval is a different and unrelated feature) that removes the 24 hour restrictions? In our case, whenever the game goes on sale, we get a large influx of new users, who have genuine questions, and proper bug reports. We’ve noticed a huge turn-off when users come to participate, but can’t as they are new, and even after asking a moderator for help, still can’t.

I suggest modifying the relevant values in your Site Settings. It will make you a little more vulnerable to spam, but the tradeoff may be worth it in your case since you have a large number of new users signing up and posting dozens of times in the same day.

@codinghorror, I will talk to the site admins about that.

Besides that - what are your thoughts on allowing moderators to “approve” users to remove the restrictions on a case-by-case basis, without opening the site as a whole to more potential spam.

This is an issue for me as well.

As an admin, I would like to be able to do whatever I need to in my community. Instead of finding a workaround, why can’t I just do what I need directly. This contradicts to my status of administrator. If an admin wants to do something in their community, I can’t see any reasons why to prevent them to do so. Sounds counterproductive to me. What’s more, we simply cannot foresee all use-cases, so we cannot say for sure that forcing TL limits when splitting is done by admins is always reasonable.


We hit this issue as well.

I don’t understand the reasoning. The limitation is to restrict what a new user can do, it should not restrict what a moderator can do.

Isn’t the purpose of this restriction designed to limit the damage of a bogus new user?

If a new user posts a single topic, and then the discussion leads to a place where it should be split, there is no reason to stop a moderator from splitting the topic.


I agree with others that suggest that such limitations seem to be a defense against spam so I see no logical reason that this user limitation could not be circumvented by admin or moderator intervention.

We had a really keen level 1 user giving a bunch of feedback on different areas of our product - with a different post on each area. He ran out of allowed new topics and resorted to adding on to unrelated posts.

As an admin and moderator I’d like to reorganize now while I’m looking through the posts but I have the same 17 hour wait. I’ve promoted the user to level 2, though still no dice.

I love Discourse though this is one of the first bits of very unexpected admin limitations.

I agree that this should be solvable on a per user basis or allow admins and moderators to circumvent.


Why don’t you edit your site settings to change this, then? What is stopping you from doing this?

I have now upped the number of posts allowed.

I am fine with our users having a higher post limit in our little corner of the world compared to any spam risk.

However, generally speaking about Discourse, I still don’t see why this should be a limitation for an admin or even something that could be changed on a per user basis. The initial barrier and work-around via changing a global setting just has that ineffable air of wrongness about it to the degree where I felt compelled to raise it as an issue.

It felt initially like a bug and then upon reading the earlier posts I understood the logic of essentially conferring the constraints of the user to the admin - though I remain unconvinced. :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

I appreciate the consistent stance @codinghorror and the rest of the Discourse team have on rights and simplicity, etc. Discourse is one of the best software projects I have ever had the pleasure to use. I recommend Discourse to everyone and sigh in disappointment whenever I use other forum sites. This just seemed to be off and I thought a little tweak here could make Discourse better. Just my $0.02

1 Like

Why does it seem ineffably wrong to you that new users, who just signed up, should be strongly rate limited? These are exactly the riskiest users who could be spammers. If you are absolutely confident that nobody that signs up for your site will ever be a spammer or griefer – then it’s safe to change the setting. If you are vetting users externally, for example, and only let paying customers create accounts.

We’re not talking about new users who just signed up† – the problem is that administrators and moderators run into this limit!

On a technical level, I see why this might happen, but from a community-management perspective, there is absolutely no reason to rate-limit moderators splitting out posts by new users specifically.

†unless your moderators are new users who just signed up – but then you’ve probably got other problems :wink:

Oh you mean taking ownership of a post as that user. It’s a weird edge case. :man_shrugging:

1 Like