Poll: Private Messaging
Poll
 | 28 votes (87.5%) | ||
| | 4 votes (12.5%) |
32 members have voted
July 5th, 2010 at 6:27:13 PM
permalink
Coming soon to the forum will be the much-awaited Private Messaging feature, where members can send private messages to other members.
The purpose of this poll is to help us decide if it should be enabled by default for everyone, or disabled by default. You will always be able to enable it or disable it as you wish, but the Wizard thought it would be good to ask the community which they would prefer to start with, and I agreed.
So, please cast your votes.
The purpose of this poll is to help us decide if it should be enabled by default for everyone, or disabled by default. You will always be able to enable it or disable it as you wish, but the Wizard thought it would be good to ask the community which they would prefer to start with, and I agreed.
So, please cast your votes.
July 5th, 2010 at 6:39:26 PM
permalink
I prefer en able by default. It is not like you are giving out home phone numbers. I've been on BBSs like this for almost 20 years and find it nice to be able to get to someone personally or reveive the occcasional personal message, abuse is rare.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
July 5th, 2010 at 7:01:35 PM
permalink
I think I like private messaging enabled by default. But I'd also like to be able to block members who spam and/or abuse the feature.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
July 5th, 2010 at 7:06:19 PM
permalink
Quote: rdw4potusI think I like private messaging enabled by default. But I'd also like to be able to block members who spam and/or abuse the feature.
agree with this myself
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell! She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
July 5th, 2010 at 7:25:09 PM
permalink
Not only should it be enabled by default, I see no reason to turn it off.
Although many of us have been clamoring for it, it would not surprise me to find that it is used very infrequently.
I also believe that instead of blocking spammers and abusers, there should be a method of flagging the person for possible account cancellation, or having the privilege of sending ANY PMs disabled.
Although many of us have been clamoring for it, it would not surprise me to find that it is used very infrequently.
I also believe that instead of blocking spammers and abusers, there should be a method of flagging the person for possible account cancellation, or having the privilege of sending ANY PMs disabled.
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
July 5th, 2010 at 8:24:15 PM
permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBearNot only should it be enabled by default, I see no reason to turn it off.
Although many of us have been clamoring for it, it would not surprise me to find that it is used very infrequently.
I also believe that instead of blocking spammers and abusers, there should be a method of flagging the person for possible account cancellation, or having the privilege of sending ANY PMs disabled.
That would be my preferred method as well. Currently, restricted accounts cannot post messages; once PM's are implemented, they won't be able to send PM's either.
But some people may wish to not be bothered with them, and I can understand that, therefore there will always be the ability (as there is with other forum software) to refuse to accept private messages.
