Things like throttling are a matter of "dialing it in". They clearly focused only on testing to see if it [i]worked[/i] to fix a particular problem, not how it affected players at large by consequence. Someone probably threw out a number, "Let's do 10 mins. That sounds okay.", and they went ahead and implemented it. I don't think it went all the way up to Chris Barrett for a decision (hence his latest tweets about agreeing it's too harsh), or he was too busy with other things to really question it and maybe wanted a stop-gap solution fast to circle back on later after seeing the impact. This is by no means a good way of doing things, but sometimes the better alternative to waiting and doing nothing. They made an assumption on how to solve 1-2 problems at once without validating it with users. That could have [i]easily[/i] been avoided if they either (1) asked the community a quick poll first what we thought would be fair out of a couple of options, or (2) went with a time limit [i]just[/i] short enough that people couldn't do the exploit instead of simultaneously trying to artificially force a long time investment into rallies from players. THEN if it still wasn't as effective as they liked they could make a small increase in the throttle or try a different solution.