|
|
Post by Lightning on Jun 6, 2014 8:33:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Tidus on Jun 6, 2014 8:33:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cloud on Jun 7, 2014 5:51:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cloud on Jun 7, 2014 5:52:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cloud on Jun 7, 2014 5:53:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cloud on Jun 7, 2014 5:53:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cloud on Jun 7, 2014 5:54:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cloud on Jun 7, 2014 5:54:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cloud on Jun 7, 2014 5:54:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cloud on Jun 7, 2014 5:54:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cloud on Jun 7, 2014 5:59:17 GMT -5
I count to 11 seconds and the end result is a 12-14 second gap between posts
I count to 10 seconds and i get the "you can't post twice within 10 seconds" message
the counting speed of the quick reply clock throws me off!
But my aim would be to post within 11 seconds each time so that i can at least get 5 posts per minute. However the 10 seconds between posts is a lot of pressure in having to make sure we've copied and pasted the link correctly including all of the image tags................ let alone copying the number we are intending on copying.... would be a silly moment if i intended on copying XXXIV and copy/pasted XXXVI instead - as an example.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cloud on Jun 7, 2014 6:03:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cloud on Jun 7, 2014 6:03:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cloud on Jun 7, 2014 6:03:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Lightning on Jun 7, 2014 6:10:01 GMT -5
It helped me by having them ready in tabs and previewed ahead of time to be sure and using another clock online with seconds on it.
|
|
