Poll

18 votes (45%)
22 votes (55%)

40 members have voted

Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1351
  • Posts: 22435
August 15th, 2012 at 10:01:15 PM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

So if you post them on a seperate site and post a link to the site, thats OK?



No, because then you are involving this site.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
ahiromu
ahiromu
Joined: Jan 15, 2010
  • Threads: 112
  • Posts: 2101
August 15th, 2012 at 11:19:54 PM permalink
I don't know exactly where the real and actual laws stand on this, but a good starting point would be with telephone recording laws (a quick wiki works). This isn't the EXACT same thing, but you could argue implied privacy in "private messages". Personally, I don't see how anyone could be stupid enough to write something to someone that they don't want to get out.

I'll say some pretty ridiculously insensitive, racist, and bigoted comments to a couple of friends on Facebook. The thing is that these are friends who will just laugh it off, then say something similar back to me. The only name for people who send a random PM to someone they barely know that they might be ashamed of... is just plain stupid.
Its - Possessive; It's - "It is" / "It has"; There - Location; Their - Possessive; They're - "They are"
RogerKint
RogerKint
Joined: Dec 5, 2011
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 1886
August 15th, 2012 at 11:48:43 PM permalink
If MustangSally reveals even one PM'd love note from me I'll die of embarrassment.

Keep 'em sealed!
100% risk of ruin
weaselman
weaselman
Joined: Jul 11, 2010
  • Threads: 20
  • Posts: 2349
August 16th, 2012 at 3:55:45 AM permalink
Quote: ahiromu

I don't know exactly where the real and actual laws stand on this, but a good starting point would be with telephone recording laws (a quick wiki works). This isn't the EXACT same thing, but you could argue implied privacy in "private messages".


No, this is not the same thing, it is completely different.
There is no law or implication, that what you tell me over the phone will remain confidential. Only that it will not be recorded without your consent (not even that in most states btw). There is nothing preventing me from repeating what you told me over the phone to a third party.
In any case I am not sure why you are even comparing the content of PM to a phone conversation. It is much closer to an email. And the latter has much less even implied privacy than phone conversations do. With the phone, at least, if you are in one of the "double consent" states, and you were not informed that the conversation is being recorded, you can be assured, there are no (legal) records of it after you have finished. With email, there is always a record, most of the time more than one, even if you delete everything from your computer, even if you delete it from the server. Email is permanent.

Regardless, these subtle differences concern subpoenas and law enforcement - peaking into somebody else's conversations. There are no laws forbidding you from disclosing the content of your own conversation to anyone (unless, the information was disclosed to you on a specific condition of privacy).
"When two people always agree one of them is unnecessary"
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 108
  • Posts: 7198
August 16th, 2012 at 4:38:43 AM permalink
Quote: FrGamble

Let's not forget priest- penitent.

I obviously value and respect the needed place for confidental and private conversations, even on a gambling forum.



YIKES!!! Sorry, father... I missed that biggie!!
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 221
  • Posts: 12156
August 16th, 2012 at 5:56:22 AM permalink
Quote: ahiromu

I don't know exactly where the real and actual laws stand on this, but a good starting point would be with telephone recording laws (a quick wiki works). This isn't the EXACT same thing, but you could argue implied privacy in "private messages". Personally, I don't see how anyone could be stupid enough to write something to someone that they don't want to get out.



"Law" has nothing to do with it. It is about the sites policy. With all the back-and-forth on this thread the reality is boiled to a few short points.


1. This is a private web site. It is not the US Mail and it is not a one-to-one telephon"law" e call. While the law may still me undefined on expectation of privacy with what amounts to a glorified email, the "law" on WoV is simple, and that "law" is that all PMs have an expectation of privacy unless clearly expressed otherwise on the part of the sender.

2. The penalty for noncompliance is great yet limited. Wizard may ban you same as a casino can 86 a card counter. Both are private property and there is no appeal process, you are gone. Unless your life is about one blog, your life will move on and WoV will move on, apart from each other.

Knowing this, it should be clearly obvious that insults or worse yet threats should not be sent in a PM. If you get them either block the member or alert site management if a threat crosses the line. But for crying out loud, posting a PM because someone said something? What is this, a Facebook group for junior high girls?
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear 
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 180
  • Posts: 10301
August 16th, 2012 at 6:50:55 AM permalink
I screwed up and posted this in the Discussion about suspenstion list thread. I would have edited/deleted it, except I already got a reply there, so pardon this duplicate post:




Sorry I'm late to this discussion. Here's my opinions and input.

Often, PMs are used for things that nave no reason being private.



Recently, someone posted in Dan's thread about the craps table he's selling (giving away?), if it's been spoken for. The post included a comment to respond via PM. Why? Clearly, if they want to talk about the terms of a potential deal, that should be private, but whether or not it's still available should be a public reply.



A while back, I got a PM regarding my Poker For Roulette side bet. The context of the PM was a potential problem with my idea.

I felt that the PM was sent privately to protect me from the down-side of someone at a game distributor from seeing this potential problem. But I have nothing to hide, so I responded in my thread about the bet, and included the context of the PM. I did NOT identify the sender. But I still got a followup PM from that person that I had violated the sanctity of the PM. Really? The only one possibly being hurt by my actions was me, so what's the issue?

A further follow-up PM prompted me to edit the post in question, but was it really necessary?
I invented a few casino games. Info: http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ 覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧 Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
Doc
Doc
Joined: Feb 27, 2010
  • Threads: 45
  • Posts: 7043
August 16th, 2012 at 7:34:03 AM permalink
I don't know of anything I have ever said in a P.M. on this forum that I would object to having revealed to anyone anywhere. I generally use a P.M. (as opposed to a thread post) when I know exactly the member I want to provide info to or to receive reply info from and don't think the conversation needs to take everyone else's time to read.

As an example, yesterday I sent a P.M. to a member asking about the availability of a new chip design at a particular casino. I was confident that if the chip was available, that member would know. He did know, and he gave me some details. I expect that very soon I will be making a post of that info in the Casino Chip of the Day thread. I can't imagine that either that member or I would have any problem if our entire exchange of half a dozen messages were posted publicly in the forum, but there was no need to burden everyone else in the process.

Since there seems to be a paranoia/hysteria going around about the sanctity of the private messages, I guess I will need to avoid mentioning who I got the info from and exactly what he said, but that seems rather petty. Everyone else here will probably be able to deduce, just as I did, the best source of the info I was seeking. I think it would be better to be able to give the source the credit for the info without "worrying" that I might be breaking some kind of rule. The way I'm reading some comments here, even if that member told me it was OK to tell everyone what he said, if I did that I would be breaking the rule.

Why would anyone want to go on an internet forum and tell someone else their deepest, darkest secrets, while hoping, expecting, and even demanding that they never be revealed? I just don't see it; I don't know why anyone would use the internet in that way. Maybe that's why I never got into Facebook and all of the privacy hassles there.
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear 
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 180
  • Posts: 10301
August 16th, 2012 at 8:18:25 AM permalink
Doc -

That's a very good example of the other good use of private messages. I.E. There was no info that you wanted to keep private, but that you knew that nobody but the intended recipient would be interested in. So you kept us out of your side discussion. Thank you.

I reviewed some of my private messages. Some of them were general questions that are better served by asking in the forums, so why make them private? And that's what I responded. FYI: Questions such as details of the patent process from newbies. I.E. Info that I had gotten from Dan, from his posts that were already on the forum. Yeah, the search function exists, but isn't great. But the solution certainly is not a private message.


For what it's worth, I did not vote, because neither response is 100% applicable.
I invented a few casino games. Info: http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ 覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧 Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
dwheatley
dwheatley
Joined: Nov 16, 2009
  • Threads: 25
  • Posts: 1246
August 16th, 2012 at 8:38:54 AM permalink
You can have a forum rule to protect contents of PM, but I generally don't see the point or agree with it.

There is no other form of casual private conversation that is protected in the same way. Furthermore, the posting of a PM is not even verifiable. The sender is essentially anonymous (I doubt IPs are even tracked), and the text can be edited by the receiver before being made public. When someone posts the content of a PM, I ignore it. Completely unreliable.
Wisdom is the quality that keeps you out of situations where you would otherwise need it

  • Jump to: