" Martin": 10 April 7:51 AM: "Can anyone trust such a person?" (who makes a PM public) Pobre cito. You're breaking my heart. I disagree on Private Messages. Obviously they were set up for one on one communication, usually, I would guess, to convey information the group would have no interest in. If, however, "Martin" did send the PM to Jack that Jack cited, it was obviously intended to hurt. There is no sanctity in a PM intended to hurt the recipient. And the sender of such a PM should be prepared to have it made public. Simple solution: don't send PM's intended to hurt. But if you do, spare us the hypocritical whining when they are made public. I would never reveal the content of a PM from a Mudcat friend. However, if somebody is attacked, either in a thread or a PM, it's up to that individual to respond---or not. Either by PM or publicly. If the PM is revealed and the group has no interest, there's another simple solution for the group----ignore it.
|