I don't... Some problems just get brushed aside when they aren't on the digest (like Knight's tour) and if we increase the rate, people with 9 of the same problem will just put them in 9 different problems instead of just one problem... so the queue will increase this way.

It also takes time for debating about problems, changing them, and giving them thumbs up. As of now, there are only 3 problems with +3 or more which means only 3 possible problems could go on the site.

Anyway, if you are looking for a submitted problem to go onto the site, look in the chatterbox for the conversation about this.

Two a day is plenty; any more and each problem wouldn't get the exposure it [usually] deserves. Many people can only get on once a day, for a short time. Really, there's no rush. The queue has diminished by about 20% from only a month ago, and as long as the rate of posting and deletion outdoes the rate of submission, we're gaining all the time.

We don't need a ton of problems to be approved, waiting to be posted. There are more than plenty active voters, and the problems in the voting queue that aren't approved are waiting for changes by the author, or are simply still being debated. 10 problems is enough, also; I think some problems get too much "pre-live exposure" as it is. If there were 30 in there, sure, there'd be more approved, but people with access to the queue would have full solutions weeks before a problem was live on the site.

Much of the fun of this site for a lot of people, something it seems you've missed, is just putting out ideas and solving a problem collaboratively (not rushing to be the first and only person to post an answer). If problems sit in queue too long, that idea gets killed when someone posts a mile-long solution five minutes after the problem goes live; and if problems were to come any faster, there wouldn't be much or any discussion to any of them, as many fewer people would see each problem. Most visitors only ever look at the current latest problem when they come here.

There are always a few problems with +3 in queue, ready to be posted. If not (something that hasn't happened yet), levik can always push a problem manually.

=)

You should TRY it before you dismiss is as "more problems means less input".

Another possibility would be to have more than one "latest" problem (perhaps all the problems posted that day) showing up on the front page.... And it could be made more obvious how to get to the newest problems, or perhaps more "flashy" so more people will click on it.

As for your "not rushing to be the first... to post an answer"... are you suggesting that if I have a solution, I should post only a short answer, not show one way to solve it, and not explain how I came to the solution? Or are you perhaps making reference to my earlier comments?

Cheers

P.S. I've had my first two submitted problems (queue weight = 1) "stuck" around 41 for more than a week. I was under the impression that they would move down roughly at a speed corresponding to the speed problems are getting posted from the "top 10".... but that doesn't seem to be the case. Am I misunderstanding how this works? That is, why might problems not move much, even though problems are being posted?

It's simple statistics. The site gets at least 40% less visiotrs on weekends than on weekdays. Therefore, to assure roughly the same "number of eyeballs" reach a problem while it's the top one, we decrease the rate of posting by a half.

I am not sure why everyone is so anxious to go and see all the new problems right away. This site has an archive of over 650 problems sitting and waiting for you to look at. Now I bet most of them are "new" for you. You don't have to read their solutions, and nobody would think worse of you for commenting on something a year old (in fact discussions like these sometimes bring old problems back into the limelight).

If the reason you want the rate upped is only so that you can see YOUR problems on the site faster, consider that most people rarely "click through" to the older puzzles. Would you wish your own to become "old" after only an hour or so?

I would disagree with you on the last point... It has kept my attention even when we only had 1 problem per day. (We DID try raising the problems, so I am pretty sure I know what would happen.)

I don't understand why less people would come here on weekends as that is where I come here more often.

Flooble is a journey, not a destination... In general, I think a problem won't be noticed as much if it appears less. People will just brush aside problems that they would work on otherwise.

I think what DJ means about posting a solution together is this... Working together and using teamwork to solve problems is a good idea.

To add to the sample pool...

I'm one of the 60% "diversion from work flooblers" and I spend most of my weekends covered in oil under a car. I usually have a look in the morning when I start to find a problem to keep me amused during the morning and again at lunchtime for the afternoon, so two new problems per day suits me fine.

I find it particularly interesting when the discussion around a problem spawns other problems or when there is more than method of solution. (eg the number square problem that's currently live). I agree with previous posts that if the number of problems per day increased that some of this discussion would be lost as people instead looked to solve the next problem rather than looked to expand or put an alternative view on a current problem.

However, there are occasions when I find the two per day rate frustrating. For example, when there are riddles or knights & liars type problems that usually take all of 30 secs to solve; or when there are several pure maths (eg calculus) problems that I've no hope of solving. It's at these times I wish that the problems were more frequent.

I'm sure though that this is just a matter of taste and that some of our fellow flooblers find hours of amusement in calculus problems (or find some of the logic based problems tedious). So when the latest problem doesn't suit my taste I either look elsewhere or pick a random problem and try to come up with something new for it.

On balance, I'd rather have to go elsewhere occasionally for my distractions than lose some of the banter that comes out through problems being 'current' for longer. There's also the inevitable problem that once the current reserve is substantially reduced, then the issue of quantity vs quality arises. From what I've seen on my searches elsewhere many sites promote quantity over quality and there is a lot of dross to filter before reaching a gem.

Hmmmm... I must admit... a well worded (and somewhat convincing) argument.
How 'bout THREE? :-) (particularly when the first two for that day are tedious/easy problems)

That's a good point.. I already come here like I have OCD, and it takes a bit of time to keep up with things even at the current 'slow' rate of posting. Any more and I might have to drop out of school to keep pace..