Poll

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

40 members have voted

Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 124
  • Posts: 12979
August 16th, 2012 at 9:04:01 AM permalink
Quote: dwheatley

I agree with the rule in its entirety and believe that the contents of private messages should be held in greater sanctity than those of any other conversation with the intention of confidentiality, even if said confidentiality has not been previously agreed upon on the part of the recipient.



I apologize for quoting something that you did not say, DWheatley, and will Edit if you wish; but the purpose is to emphasize that you made what I think is a really good point. If someone were to post the content of a PM that the sender did not want to be publicly known, he or she can simply deny that he or she said the quoted material.

However, I think that such postings of PM's that were allegedly sent detract from the greater purpose of this site, which is discussion, so I still find it preferable to have a Rule against the re-postings of PM's , whether they be real or fictional.

I did feel the need to point out that DWheatley's argument is otherwise a home run for the other side of this argument, which happens to be the side of the argument I oppose, but still an excellent point. Further, someone COULD technically give a person their password (RISKY) so that another person might independently verify the contents of the PM...or just take a screenshot.

It is for this reason that any denials would be useless, if another person were absolutely determined to prove that the person doing the denying said what the recipient is claiming he/she said, so that kind of detracts from DWheatley's solid point. It also, in my opinion, furthers the argument in favor of confidentiality. The difference between a PM and phone call (absent a recording) is that a PM creates a record designed to be non-public, and while there are sometimes mitigating legal/safety reasons for the sharing of a PM, that is not often the case.

I did think of something. I tend to sign the bulk of my PM's with my first name and last initial, and if I wanted this information to be public, I would sign all of my posts in such a way...which I don't...because I do not want that information to be public given other semi-identifying information about me available via my posts. My concern, however, has not to do with the majority of the Members of this site, but those who may read the information that may not be members, namely, potentially anyone else on Earth.
Vultures can't be choosers.
Nareed
Nareed
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
  • Threads: 373
  • Posts: 11413
August 16th, 2012 at 9:30:07 AM permalink
Quote: Doc

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?



Because the site rules say they shouldn't be revealed?

You obviously use PMs a certain way which, in your case, make any disclosure of the content irrelevant to your life. But not everyone does that. Some can, for example, use PMs to hash out differences without clogging up the forum. things can get ugly and heated in such exchanges, and it's best to keep that private.

Some may want to discuss something in confidence for some reason (these are PRIVATE messages, after all). Just as an example, BTW, you might choose to express support for someone in a way that would be a violation of forum rules if posted publicly. You might say something like "That word you got suspended for didn't even go far enough in the case of this effing son of a @%&$#!!!!" Or you may disclose an address or phone number, too, for conveninece.

And I'm sure there are a number of other reasons I can't even think about for keeping private messages private.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
Ayecarumba
Ayecarumba
Joined: Nov 17, 2009
  • Threads: 236
  • Posts: 6763
August 16th, 2012 at 11:24:55 AM permalink
I voted "sealed". I liken the rule to the stripes on the side of the road separating the shoulder from the roadway. You are not supposed to cross that line, even though you can. Waiting patiently in traffic, while you could drive on the shoulder (putting others at risk), is a sign of good citizenship. Abiding by the PM rule as stated is similar.

If there was a good reason for staying on main roadway, I expect the highway builder would have installed a barrier. I don't think the PM rule is a "K" rail, since the Wizard would have to suspend himself for posting predictions sent via PM for the various site contests. However, it would be very easy for all kinds of mayhem to develop if interpretation of the circumstances when release is appropriate is left to the "group". The current blanket rule, akin to a line of cones along the highway (you can cross them in an emergency, but what a mess to fix), seems simplest to me.
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
RaleighCraps
RaleighCraps
Joined: Feb 20, 2010
  • Threads: 79
  • Posts: 2501
August 16th, 2012 at 11:41:24 AM permalink
I would say the intent of the rule is to prevent release of the content of a PM, when the release of said PM would cause embarrassment or harm to the sender of the PM.

In Doc's example, it is most likely the case that whomever provided the chip info, probably wouldn't mind the credit.
So, there should not be a penalty for Doc releasing said information, although courtesy would have Doc checking first (and knowing Doc, he would).

Here's an example,
Suppose I got into some words with some members over the math of craps (I know, pretty far fetched example, but stay with me).

If I so desired, I SHOULD be able to say I received PMs telling me to carry on the good fight, and ignore the barbs.

I SHOULD NOT be able to say, I received PMs from xxxxxxx, supporting my position(s), as those people may not wish to be identified
Always borrow money from a pessimist; They don't expect to get paid back ! Be yourself and speak your thoughts. Those who matter won't mind, and those that mind, don't matter!
pacomartin
pacomartin
Joined: Jan 14, 2010
  • Threads: 649
  • Posts: 7895
August 16th, 2012 at 11:41:42 AM permalink
I was sort of under the impression that this forum was about items of intellectual curiosity which may or may not be related to gaming. Mathematics of games, business of gaming, politics, some speculation into religion, literature, etc. It's probably a poor place to exorcise personal demons or seek psychiatric, marriage, or sexual help. In any case, I can't imagine sending of such personal nature (in either a post or a PM) that I would care who read it.
Doc
Doc
Joined: Feb 27, 2010
  • Threads: 45
  • Posts: 7043
August 16th, 2012 at 12:36:00 PM permalink
Quote: pacomartin

I was sort of under the impression that ....


I had a similar impression a couple of years ago. Now I think the forum is about posting most anything on most any topic someone would like to post about. Relevance to Vegas or even to gaming seems to have become just a minor possibility. I don't really have a problem with that, but sometimes it seems that things go wildly out of bounds and pollute the environment around here. The thread that led to the creation of this thread was purportedly to discuss and promote wagers on a physical challenge, but it certainly seems to be much more about how to criticize, bait, argue, boast, deride, expose, and inflame. Some have likened its "popularity" to watching a train wreck. Is there some cutoff such that after so many members have been suspended due to comments in a single thread that the thread itself should be suspended?
AcesAndEights
AcesAndEights
Joined: Jan 5, 2012
  • Threads: 67
  • Posts: 4299
August 16th, 2012 at 1:18:20 PM permalink
Quote: Doc

I had a similar impression a couple of years ago. Now I think the forum is about posting most anything on most any topic someone would like to post about. Relevance to Vegas or even to gaming seems to have become just a minor possibility. I don't really have a problem with that, but sometimes it seems that things go wildly out of bounds and pollute the environment around here. The thread that led to the creation of this thread was purportedly to discuss and promote wagers on a physical challenge, but it certainly seems to be much more about how to criticize, bait, argue, boast, deride, expose, and inflame. Some have likened its "popularity" to watching a train wreck. Is there some cutoff such that after so many members have been suspended due to comments in a single thread that the thread itself should be suspended?


It's pretty much impossible to keep any internet forum "on-topic," hence why most forums have a dedicated "off-topic" section. Personally I just try to stick to the threads and topics which interest me. I've remained involved in the HB challenge thread since I have money riding on it and thought it was an interesting experiment on 2 parties agreeing to "fair odds" on an event that isn't usually gambled on it. It's sad that it's come to what it is now, and I wish I could look away.

But anyway, back to the whole point of this message board, all you can do is "be the change you hope to see in the world." By that I mean, contribute and participate in the threads you like, and stay away from the ones you don't! I feel like there are some smart people here who can chime in on non-gambling and non-Vegas things, but that should be the real focus.
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
weaselman
weaselman
Joined: Jul 11, 2010
  • Threads: 20
  • Posts: 2349
August 16th, 2012 at 1:49:48 PM permalink
Quote: Nareed

Just as an example, BTW, you might choose to express support for someone in a way that would be a violation of forum rules if posted publicly. You might say something like "That word you got suspended for didn't even go far enough in the case of this effing son of a @%&$#!!!!"



This is just brilliant. Use the "PM privacy" rule to run around the "no personal insult" rule.
Nareed, you should have been a lawyer. And when I say "lawyer", I mean a "dirty" one, one of those folks that make their living getting murderers off on a technicality.
One problem - you are not smart enough for that. Nowhere in the forum rule #1 it says that personal insults are allowed in private.
"When two people always agree one of them is unnecessary"
Woldus
Woldus
Joined: Jan 13, 2011
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 215
August 16th, 2012 at 2:14:46 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman


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?



I really want to make a joke about a PM and "Facebook group for junior high girls" but I wouldn't want to run the risk of it being revealed...
rdw4potus
rdw4potus
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 7157
August 16th, 2012 at 4:02:28 PM permalink
Quote: weaselman

This is just brilliant. Use the "PM privacy" rule to run around the "no personal insult" rule.
Nareed, you should have been a lawyer. And when I say "lawyer", I mean a "dirty" one, one of those folks that make their living getting murderers off on a technicality.
One problem - you are not smart enough for that. Nowhere in the forum rule #1 it says that personal insults are allowed in private.



But if you make the insult in private, you can apply leverage and bully the recipient into staying silent because revealing the contents of the PM is grounds for suspension.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett

  • Jump to: