|
|
Post by Cloud on Jun 6, 2014 6:22:57 GMT -5
Great idea to practice, my internet connection is not always the best. I might end up slowing people down occasionally as i know whenever i click post it doesn't automatically cycle through and respond. In spam challenges i try to post as close to the 10 second rule as possible, if i use the system clock i find that i post too early. If i count to 11 myself i generally can make it 10 seconds between posts (when my internet doesn't slow me down).
|
|
|
|
Post by Lightning on Jun 6, 2014 6:41:44 GMT -5
It's hard to tell with how the time is calculated on this site... maybe a host could change that? But I managed to clock and time it so I was posting without getting a warning every 11 second so about 4 numbers every 44-47 seconds. So probably could get a chunk of 50 done every 10 minutes if I have them all set up beforehand in different windows and tabs. So if math is right that would mean 300 an hour if all 300 are set up beforehand without stoppage. Meaning 6.666666666667 hours if we split it up with one person doing large chunks and switching out. Doesn't take into account screw ups though.
If we could get on a good schedule where two people are posting at the same time every 11 seconds without screwups we could double the output with 100 done every 10 minutes barring any screwups. That could tricky. And would require trust in the two people doing it. It wouldn't be refreshing and accidently missing 20 seconds. It would be looking at a clock and posting every 11-12 seconds, someone else posting 3 or 4 seconds after you and them posting every 11-12 seconds and that going on forevers until 100 were done. Lots of set up and tabs and windows.
This challenge is looking less fun. lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Selphie on Jun 6, 2014 6:47:03 GMT -5
It's hard to tell with how the time is calculated on this site... maybe a host could change that? But I managed to clock and time it so I was posting without getting a warning every 11 second so about 4 numbers every 44-47 seconds. So probably could get a chunk of 50 done every 10 minutes if I have them all set up beforehand in different windows and tabs. So if math is right that would mean 300 an hour if all 300 are set up beforehand without stoppage. Meaning 6.666666666667 hours if we split it up with one person doing large chunks and switching out. Doesn't take into account screw ups though. If we could get on a good schedule where two people are posting at the same time every 11 seconds without screwups we could double the output with 100 done every 10 minutes barring any screwups. That could tricky. And would require trust in the two people doing it. It wouldn't be refreshing and accidently missing 20 seconds. It would be looking at a clock and posting every 11-12 seconds, someone else posting 3 or 4 seconds after you and them posting every 11-12 seconds and that going on forevers until 100 were done. Lots of set up and tabs and windows. This challenge is looking less fun. lol You can get yourself into a system to maximize getting it every 10 seconds, you just have to put the effort into it! I posted every 10 seconds (it was rough at first finding a system, but I eventually got one) for 22 hours straight, so if I can figure out a system, I know you guys can. It's not impossible to get the exact 10 second mark! |
|
|
|
Post by Kimahri Ronso on Jun 6, 2014 6:49:16 GMT -5
I have added a clock next to the quick reply. Whilst it's not as accurate, it may help  |
|
|
|
Post by Lightning on Jun 6, 2014 6:53:59 GMT -5
Changing this "4 minutes ago " to 9:53:55 would be even cooler.  |
|
|
|
Post by Kimahri Ronso on Jun 6, 2014 6:55:03 GMT -5
I can do that  |
|
|
|
Post by Lightning on Jun 6, 2014 7:08:27 GMT -5
It's hard to tell with how the time is calculated on this site... maybe a host could change that? But I managed to clock and time it so I was posting without getting a warning every 11 second so about 4 numbers every 44-47 seconds. So probably could get a chunk of 50 done every 10 minutes if I have them all set up beforehand in different windows and tabs. So if math is right that would mean 300 an hour if all 300 are set up beforehand without stoppage. Meaning 6.666666666667 hours if we split it up with one person doing large chunks and switching out. Doesn't take into account screw ups though. If we could get on a good schedule where two people are posting at the same time every 11 seconds without screwups we could double the output with 100 done every 10 minutes barring any screwups. That could tricky. And would require trust in the two people doing it. It wouldn't be refreshing and accidently missing 20 seconds. It would be looking at a clock and posting every 11-12 seconds, someone else posting 3 or 4 seconds after you and them posting every 11-12 seconds and that going on forevers until 100 were done. Lots of set up and tabs and windows. This challenge is looking less fun. lol You can get yourself into a system to maximize getting it every 10 seconds, you just have to put the effort into it! I posted every 10 seconds (it was rough at first finding a system, but I eventually got one) for 22 hours straight, so if I can figure out a system, I know you guys can. It's not impossible to get the exact 10 second mark! You should mention that to the other tribe. Our tribe is super smart and will not risk screwing up one time and losing 4 or 5 seconds posting again when the error shows up. Going every 11 seconds = no risk of getting a flood warning. Pink thinks smart! |
|
|
|
Post by Tidus on Jun 6, 2014 8:17:36 GMT -5
Any objections if I take the lead on this? Just because I am pretty flexible this weekend and can pretty much be here whenever we decide to do this. If someone else knows they will be around, they are welcome too as well.
Light, do you want to practice together at some point? I am sure we could co-ordinate it to post more than 1 every 10 seconds.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lightning on Jun 6, 2014 8:20:16 GMT -5
Yeah we can go over to the test thread and try to practice the first 10 together?
Ill post around 00:-03 and you post at 05:-08 to start and then after that go for posting exactly 11 seconds after and we should be fine.
I'll go set up five tabs with my numbers 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 and you with yours 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 ? Then when we're ready we'll say it in here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tidus on Jun 6, 2014 8:26:22 GMT -5
Ok doing it now
|
|
|
|
Post by Lightning on Jun 6, 2014 8:27:33 GMT -5
I got my tabs open and ready to go. Let me know when you do too then we can pick a time to start.  |
|
|
|
Post by Tidus on Jun 6, 2014 8:29:50 GMT -5
Ready
|
|
|
|
Post by Lightning on Jun 6, 2014 8:30:36 GMT -5
All right. I'll start at 11:33:00 and you can start at 11:33:05 and then 10-11 seconds after each time. =)
|
|
|
|
Post by Tidus on Jun 6, 2014 8:31:04 GMT -5
Got it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lightning on Jun 6, 2014 8:35:16 GMT -5
10 in 49 seconds? That's great!
|
|
