>1000
 

Apparently someone was running a script to jack up a view count to ridiculously high which was causing a performance problem. so yeah.

Re: >1000
 

this has exciting implications.

Re: >1000
 

BAN SCOTT HOWARD

Re: >1000
 

lol

Re: >1000
 

I'm thinking that's some Firefox ReloadEvery with a quick reload time.

Re: >1000
 

banning all of scott howards accounts would probably kill the server as well

Re: >1000
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm thinking that's some Firefox ReloadEvery with a quick reload time.

[/ QUOTE ]
I tried that before, it didn't work. Has to be some other script

Re: >1000
 

[ QUOTE ]
banning all of scott howards accounts would probably kill off 90% of poggers

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: >1000
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
banning all of scott howards accounts would probably kill off 90% of poggers and 90% of USGers

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: >1000
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm thinking that's some Firefox ReloadEvery with a quick reload time.

[/ QUOTE ]
I tried that before, it didn't work. Has to be some other script

[/ QUOTE ]
That worked when I tried it for turbos (probably around 10 months ago). I haven't tried to use it recently though. It's possible that the last 2 FF updates broke the reload every script.

Re: >1000
 

im pretty sure the problem was my triple yahtzee score

\

Re: >1000
 

[ QUOTE ]
Apparently someone was running a script to jack up a view count to ridiculously high which was causing a performance problem. so yeah.

[/ QUOTE ]
this has nothing to do with me

Re: >1000
 

Actually, I think is was for special edd's thread in bbv4l.

Re: >1000
 

now its 1000+ still ghey

Re: >1000
 

Why not just amend the thread(s) with problems?

(I'm assuming the scripter viewer guy was already banned because the server load has been lifted)

Re: >1000
 

I think the issue is more along the lines of "if there's no view count displayed, people won't try to pump it up".

How appropriate that they're dealing with a BBV problem using a strategy effective on toddlers.

Re: >1000
 

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, I think is was for special edd's thread in bbv4l.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes.

Re: >1000
 

Why was it changed from >1000 to 1000+?

Re: >1000
 

so that it looks less retarted

Re: >1000
 

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, I think is was for special edd's thread in bbv4l.

[/ QUOTE ]

what did the thread say?
I am pissed I missed one of his they are all solid.

Oh yeah opera has autoreload and it DOES pump up view counts.

Re: >1000
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually, I think is was for special edd's thread in bbv4l.

[/ QUOTE ]

what did the thread say?
I am pissed I missed one of his they are all solid.

Oh yeah opera has autoreload and it DOES pump up view counts.

[/ QUOTE ]

It had nudes in the title but nothing in message (maybe an lol or something)

Re: >1000
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually, I think is was for special edd's thread in bbv4l.

[/ QUOTE ]

what did the thread say?
I am pissed I missed one of his they are all solid.

Oh yeah opera has autoreload and it DOES pump up view counts.

[/ QUOTE ]

It had nudes in the title but nothing in message (maybe an lol or something)

[/ QUOTE ]

the subject was "fluffpop nudes"

and the message was "viewcount++"