BS: Nuisance PMs..

Subject: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 08 Jul 19 - 12:41 PM

Can't remember how many times over the years I've made it clear
I'm not a fan of the PM system.
I prefer communication transparently out in the open in forum threads...
I'm not bothered checking for new messages,
unless a change in the big red number at the top of the home page
by chance catches my attention.
In the decade and a half I've been a mudcatter,
my messages count from other members is only 65...

My phone is also ex directory, and I don't do social networking.
I'm relatively happy to be an asocial hermit

I'd really wish to discourage any mudcatters with gripes
messaging me in secret...

Do it out in the open, where we all can see...

AS usual I will not break unwanted confidence by naming names..
but today's nuisance PM is worth a chuckle...

"Today while you were wasting your time ,I have done an afternoon gig, furthermore they told me i was the best performer they had had to date, this is because I practise and workk hard at performing music instead of wasting time on internet forums....

Just saying..

If mods want to delete this thread, fair enough,
but can you please leave it up for a few hours..
[for an obvious reason]
Thanks...

But if other members see value in debating this topic...???

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: DMcG
Date: 08 Jul 19 - 12:53 PM

I rarely use the PM system but on some occasions I have it when the message has been truly personal. I also use it very occasionally to send messages to someone when the message is way off thread but I think will interest the recipient, but not people more generally and would damage the flow of the thread. To my mind, it has its place.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 08 Jul 19 - 01:03 PM

DMcG - I agree entirely.. those are all valid reasons...

Like a mobile phone can [should..???] be a lifeline,
and a seriously useful tool for keeping in touch with folks you care about...

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Mrrzy
Date: 08 Jul 19 - 03:08 PM

I don't read all the threads, so it is nest to pm me of I'm not in the thread or if you just want to ask/say something to me.

And I thought this was gonna be a political thread...

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Mrrzy
Date: 08 Jul 19 - 03:09 PM

Best, not nest, sorry.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Jeri
Date: 08 Jul 19 - 03:47 PM

There are PMs by some that I delete without reading. For example, the guy who told me (I'm paraphrasing) I was the worst person ever. I believe that as the same guy (speling and capitalisation incompentencies)(not to mention logical whackiness)(not to mention thinking he's all that and a bag of crisps) who was too busy to waste time doing things like PMing people...except he did.

I actually prefer to get the juvenile bitching by PM because 1) it doesn't involve an audience, and 2) I can delete them.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 08 Jul 19 - 03:52 PM

I'm not bothered checking for new messages,
unless a change in the big red number at the top of the home page
by chance catches my attention.

No need to catch a change in that number. If you go into your messages, archive any you wish to keep, and delete the rest, then that big red number will disappear, only to reappear if you get a new message. Job done.

I could have sent this as a PM, but you might think that was 'extracting the urine'. Also, others might want to get rid of their big red number.

The other benefit of having a big red number at the top of the page is that it is a reminder that you are signed in, and so don't get to the end of a BS thread that you want to comment on only to find that you've got to go back to the membership page to log in.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 08 Jul 19 - 05:19 PM

I archive all but one of my PMs (it makes no matter which). That way, there is always a big red number to show that I am logged in but, if it is anything other than 1, then it is obvious that I have some new messages. Mind you, without checking, I can't remember when I last received a PM.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 08 Jul 19 - 05:21 PM

.... or sent one, for that matter.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 08 Jul 19 - 05:41 PM

"The Big Red One" was a pretty good war movie...

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Tattie Bogle
Date: 08 Jul 19 - 06:13 PM

PMs are useful if:
1) Your message is intended only for that one person and does not need to be be shown to the whole Mudcat world at large.
2) Follows form above: you might be trying to arrange a meeting with another Mudcat member who is visiting your town/session< As above: no need to tell people in Australia if said meeting is in Edinburgh.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Charmion
Date: 08 Jul 19 - 08:33 PM

PMs are also useful for telling another ‘Catter your phone number or email address without telling the rest of the world, too.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Jul 19 - 03:50 AM

I think PMs are fine for exchanging personal details or discussing something of limited interest to others. I prefer email where possible but where I do not have an eaddy, PMs work. However, the type we are talking about here are a nuisance and I have had to tell someone to stop PMing me after receiving a threat from them. I suppose the moderation team would intervene if it escalated, but it didn't!

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 09 Jul 19 - 07:24 AM

“I think PMs are fine for exchanging personal details or discussing something of limited interest to others. I prefer email where possible but where I do not have an eaddy, PMs work. However, the type we are talking about here are a nuisance and I have had to tell someone to stop PMing me after receiving a threat from them. I suppose the moderation team would intervene if it escalated, but it didn't!”

That’s my view exactly. If I want to argue with someone, or several someones. I prefer to do it on-thread where everyone can see, and make their own judgment, about what’s going on.

There have been a very few occasions where an in-thread opponent has PMd me. If it’s done to escalate the argument I tell them to Foxtrot Oscar, and ignore any further PMs from them. If, as happened recently, an opponent PMs me in reasonable, respectful terms in order to clarify something, or make a point that they don’t want to be public, I respond in the same way back to them.

I strongly believe that it’s perfectly possible to have bust-ups on-thread, yet have cordial PM communication. In fact, someone whom I had a major bust-up with on a thread several years ago has since become known to me in the real world, and has become a good friend.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Jack Campin
Date: 09 Jul 19 - 10:30 AM

Nobody's forcing you to read PMs. There's one Mudcatter who has a habit of trying to pursue public arguments into private correspondence. I've never opened a single one of the messages they've sent when trying to do this.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 09 Jul 19 - 10:36 AM

I've just looked..
there doesn't seem to be a function to block PMs from members
who abuse the system...

At least no mudcatters have tried selling me insurance, time share holiday apartments, or double glazing, etc, yet...

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 09 Jul 19 - 11:10 AM

There's one Mudcatter who has a habit of trying to pursue public arguments into private correspondence. I've never opened a single one of the messages they've sent when trying to do this.

If you've never opened them, how do you know what they contain?
That's like the people who argue that books by Dan Brown are poorly written, who then go on to state that they've never read one.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Jul 19 - 11:29 AM

I have no need to read your posts to know they will be nitpicking, Nigel. It's known as an educated guess.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 09 Jul 19 - 11:33 AM

Nigel - that's why I do read all PMs..

I'll give 'em the benefit of the doubt before reading...

After starting this thread, my PM count has gone up one to 666..
sorry typo.. 66

But it's not from who I thought it might be.
It's actually a mudcatter I have a lot of respect for.
So I'm taking time to think up a considered reply..

But that's one of the reasons I get uncomfortable with PMs.
They can be personal, and take a bit too much time and thought, and sometimes emotions,
to respond to properly.
Same as why I usually procrastinate replying to personal emails..

These serious PMs can turn up out of the blue and require personal engagement,
usually at a time I'd rather not have that bother.

It's much less taxing just firing off short sarcastic quips on threads;
or semi seriously engaging in robust thread battles,
while I'm bored doing chores and cooking meals....

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Mrrzy
Date: 09 Jul 19 - 11:35 AM

Good idea on checking if you're logged in! That big red Thou Shalt Not Post always startles me.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 09 Jul 19 - 07:49 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Dave the Gnome - PM
Date: 09 Jul 19 - 11:29 AM

I have no need to read your posts to know they will be nitpicking, Nigel. It's known as an educated guess.


My last two posts (my only two posts) on this thread have not been 'nitpicking' they have explained the benefits (or otherwise) of reading PMs.

Your latest comment merely shows your own predisposition to ignore valid comments.

That is obviously totally up to you.


Maybe your "educated guess" is not really that educated.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Jul 19 - 09:01 PM

Friendly banter in PMs is ace. But anyone who sends me a threatening or downright unfriendly PM will be exposed.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Joe_F
Date: 09 Jul 19 - 09:29 PM

I have the opposite difficulty with PMs. I rarely receive them, so I am not looking for them, and I liable not to notice when one is announced. Thus, I have often replied to them after a longish delay. If I expected many such communications, it would make sense for me to include my email address in my posts.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Jul 19 - 03:05 AM

My last two posts (my only two posts) on this thread have not been 'nitpicking'

Aha! So you admit that your posts on other threads are nitpicking!

My work here is done :-D

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 10 Jul 19 - 10:44 AM

My last two posts (my only two posts) on this thread have not been 'nitpicking'

Aha! So you admit that your posts on other threads are nitpicking!

Sorry, any logic in that non sequitur is totally lost on me.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Jul 19 - 11:05 AM

Yes, I thought it may be...

On the subject of Dan Brown, I think he is a decent thriller writer but don't l like all the shite presented as "facts". I commented to my mate Ted Edwards (yes, I'm a name dropper :-) ) that I could not understand whybpeople believed all the nonsense given as facts in Brown's stories. Why not, replied Ted, they have been doing it for thousands of years with the bible :-D

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Jul 19 - 11:29 AM

DtG & Nigel - see, that exchange, leading to a proper amusing punch line,
would have been wasted if you'd kept it secretly to yourselves in PMs...

Hanging our dirty washing out on the line, or bickering with the neighbours by your front gates,
for all to see,
can be far more fun for the rest of the neighbourhood...

Though saying that..
I've just had a short exchange of PMs on a highly personal matter with a mudcatter I hold in high regard .
which proves the value of and justifies the PM system when used appropriately at it's best.
Guaranteed privacy, a 'safe space' that is worthy of this increasingly abused concept..

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 11 Jul 19 - 12:16 PM

I'm up to message 69 now.. ooer mrs...

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Jul 19 - 05:56 PM

I'll not send you one then. We want your 69 to last as long as possible...

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Mo the caller
Date: 11 Jul 19 - 06:06 PM

Quick, send me a pm someone, I've archived all mine so I can't see if I'm logged in. Don't even remember archiving them.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 11 Jul 19 - 06:15 PM

If you are logged on, there will be a trace/detrace link against every topic in the main forum page.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Stanron
Date: 11 Jul 19 - 11:03 PM

Open a BS thread. If you can't post you are not logged in.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 12 Jul 19 - 03:42 AM

I never noticed that the trace/detrace links only appear if you are logged in. I can archive that last remaining PM now. Thanks Jon.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: DaveRo
Date: 12 Jul 19 - 03:52 AM

And on a thread page, the little 'pm' after the name of the poster only appears if you're logged in.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuisance PMs..
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 13 Jul 19 - 04:36 PM

And on a thread page, the little 'pm' after the name of the poster only appears if you're logged in.

So it does. You learn something every day!

DC