PRIVATE MESSAGES

It has come to my attention that abusive private messages have been sent. In the case of this happening in the future, the availability of private messages will be taken away from members after ONE WARNING. We do not wish for the forum to be used for personal vendettas. Screenshots are to be taken as proof of messages received and these will be sufficient for a warning to be issued, and all messaging rights taken away if that warning is not heeded.

What a shame some people need to be forced to tow the line! Lisa x

Yes it is a shame but I think this is the fairest way of dealing with it.

I totally agree! Lisa x

So stop sending snotty messages ! LOL

You started it! lol

It's ok anyone that is reading this. The subject is a serious one, and if any member does receive either spamming or nasty messages, screenshot it and send it to me.

I think I should take the opportunity here to apologise to some people of calling them "filatelistic laxydermic needlepushers" in my PM's. I didn't mean it!!!

Absolutely, nobody should tolerate bad behaviour! Lisa x

Quote :

I think I should take the opportunity here to apologise to some people of calling them "filatelistic laxydermic needlepushers" in my PM's. I didn't mean it!!!
_________________

Accepted. Thought that was spam

berlioz wrote:

I think I should take the opportunity here to apologise to some people of calling them "filatelistic laxydermic needlepushers" in my PM's. I didn't mean it!!!

That's ok Berlioz... I'll get over it in time.

Phew... thanks! That really lifted a weight off my shoulders.

and here I thought PM stood for Prime Minister!

Obviously as a foreigner I am easily confused . . . . . .

or maybe just my advancing years . . . .

Not as advanced in years as me !

I've been away for a few months (had no internet, actually) and I've got NO private messages waiting for me when I arrived back!

Boo Hoo!


۞۞۞۞۞ .
. . . ~ ! ♥♥ ! ~ ........................................................... ~ jes ~ ! ♥♥ !

Well maybe this will be a good thing..so long as it doesn't end up like Ciao, whereupon someone suddenly finds themselves unable to post private messages without any warnings given whatsoever. I think as long as you stand by what you have said and do make sure you issue one warning then it should work, shouldn't it.

Also I think it would be a good idea to determine exactly what warrants abuse here. After all a lot of jokey messages are sent and can be taken in the wrong context by someone who may be very sensitive. Clear guidelines may need to be set

how can you set guidelines for stuff like that though...jokey messages gone wrong...well it is the same as inappropriate jokes at work...if it is inappropriate, it is inappropriate and there is no excuse. It aint rocket science surely!

Offense is in the eye of the beholder, at the end of the day, regardless. So debating "abuse" is a fruitless issue to me, especially given some of the "abuse" that does go around that orange place.

Sorry but I get to differ. Abuse should be defined, perfectly innocent comments can and, indeed have, been twisted in such a way that they can be called abuse. I maybe can't explain this properly but maybe Rachel can !!

Okay assessment of current situation with private messages.

Members have no powers to block an individual. This causes great problems if a message is sent to another member that upset them. Different things upset different people for different reasons, and what is mild to some is hurtful to others. I will not be drawn into personal conflict between members, but have come up with a solution that suits the site.

If a member reports a message that has upset them with a screenshot and explains why, the staff here will take a decision between them as to whether that member loses the right to send messages. First decision: Majority of two admin must make the decision.

The rights of the person who sent the message will be cut off while a decision is made in order to let people calm down.

If the person accused promises in an email not to bother the person who accused again ever by message, their messages will be reinstated. BUT on another report of problems, that message facility will be taken away with no conversation IF two admin agree that their use of the message system abuses it.

Its clear cut and simple and if a reinstated message facility is given to an offender and they abuse it, they will have the message facility taken away from them.

Yay well done that would make perfect sense to me. If nothing else maybe it will make some people think about what they are writing and others will stop doing it completely!

Thingywhatsit wrote:

Okay assessment of current situation with private messages.

Members have no powers to block an individual. This causes great problems if a message is sent to another member that upset them. Different things upset different people for different reasons, and what is mild to some is hurtful to others. I will not be drawn into personal conflict between members, but have come up with a solution that suits the site.

If a member reports a message that has upset them with a screenshot and explains why, the staff here will take a decision between them as to whether that member loses the right to send messages. First decision: Majority of two admin must make the decision.

The rights of the person who sent the message will be cut off while a decision is made in order to let people calm down.

If the person accused promises in an email not to bother the person who accused again ever by message, their messages will be reinstated. BUT on another report of problems, that message facility will be taken away with no conversation IF two admin agree that their use of the message system abuses it.

Its clear cut and simple and if a reinstated message facility is given to an
offender and they abuse it, they will have the message facility taken away from them.

Might I suggest that the PM privileges of the individual are retained while any "investigation" continues. As it stands, you seem to be suggesting that you are adopting Ciao's "Guilty until proven innocent" mandate, Rachel. Pretty much everyone on FOIB agrees is shocking and I don't think they'd like to see it in action here. I know I certainly wouldn't!

Secondly, any reporting member should be providing screen shots of the entire conversation. A message on its own could be construed as upsetting, but in the context of the entire conversation, it might not be. Or it could well be that the accusing member initiated contact/chose the tone of the conversation. You might also consider having screenshots from both parties to validate what's being said on all counts.

In the quoted post, I sense an undercurrent throughout that the accusing member can pretty much do what they choose as individual messages are counted, not entire conversations.

At all times, I'd like the investigators to bear in mind this quote from Torr, which pretty much sums up Ciao members to a tee:

"Almost anything will be offensive to someone if that someone is sufficiently
unreasonable."

Ciao's Favourite Member wrote:

Secondly, any reporting member should be providing screen shots of the entire conversation. A message on its own could be construed as upsetting, but in the context of the entire conversation, it might not be. Or it could well be that the accusing member initiated contact/chose the tone of the conversation. You might also consider having screenshots from both parties to validate what's being said on all counts.

Yeah more then just a screen shot of the one message could be a good idea.

You forgot to mention going to bed without tea, as well.