120 seconds?

**tyger** · 18th February 12, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by ForresterModern

Neat, of course.

.

Hahahahahaha. That's the way I like it.

**piperdbh** · 19th February 12, 06:21 AM

Originally Posted by tyger

Jeff, how do you prepare those "molasses" for the toast and waffles?

They're good mashed up together with butter and spread in a hot biscuit, too.

**Ryan Ross** · 19th February 12, 08:17 AM

Well, the 120 second rule just nabbed me for about the third time in 24 hours. Eh, it's worth it for the security, I suppose.

Originally Posted by piperdbh

They're good mashed up together with butter and spread in a hot biscuit, too.

And that's the second time you've made me hungry, in the last 20 minutes.

**tyger** · 19th February 12, 08:32 AM

Originally Posted by piperdbh

They're good mashed up together with butter and spread in a hot biscuit, too.

Ha! Well, I was really asking Jeff about the mole-asses that he said would shine up, and he said that he liked them on his waffles. I wondered how he fixed them, and he said: "Neat." Straight-up. Now, you are a manly man if you can eat those moleasses thataway.

**Father Bill** · 18th February 12, 05:39 PM

Steve, I think it was a shorter wait a few weeks back, wasn't it?

**Tobus** · 20th February 12, 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by Father Bill

Steve, I think it was a shorter wait a few weeks back, wasn't it?

Yes, it was. They just increased it. It used to be 30 seconds or 60 seconds (can't remember for sure - all I know is that it wasn't 120 seconds).

I don't mind that much. Sometimes when I hit submit, it gives me that error, so I go back to the thread and find that my reply is posted. I'm thinking that there's a glitch somewhere between my fingers and the forum server that would be double-posting my replies if not for this feature. So to save myself from the embarrassment of incessant double-posts, the 120 second limit does me a favour.