CritiKalbILL wrote: I would think that any "bad" messages that are sent in private would be considered harrassment...kinda chickensh#t if you ask me. For once I can side with LJ.
I get em all the time and they always start out the same with "We know who and where you are"
I almost always assume that the person wrote it in a fit of rage and later regret it..but who knows
Mtn Gramma wrote: I think that the recipient of a PM should have the option of making it public. Perhaps then senders would be a bit more civil.
I AGREE!! I don't know why the rule is that you cannot... But I think if you posted the message in public, I should think it would have the desired effect of STOPPING it very quickly...
Mtn Gramma wrote: I think that the recipient of a PM should have the option of making it public. Perhaps then senders would be a bit more civil.
I AGREE!! I don't know why the rule is that you cannot... But I think if you posted the message in public, I should think it would have the desired effect of STOPPING it very quickly...
Personal Message, Private Message, use you own ethics to determine what you want to expose. Really, someone calls you a name, chances are a lot of people will agree with the sender, however you feel offended. Someone threatens you, a lot of people will come to your defense. Someone wants to carry on a discussion with you without all the trolls chiming in, that is different. Is there a need to expose the latter?
Mtn Gramma wrote: I think that the recipient of a PM should have the option of making it public. Perhaps then senders would be a bit more civil.
I AGREE!! I don't know why the rule is that you cannot... But I think if you posted the message in public, I should think it would have the desired effect of STOPPING it very quickly...
I agree as well. The policy of not being able to post a PM in the forums is enabling the whackjobs that want to threaten and attack, but don't have the balls to do it in a public forum.
As far as I'm concerned, a message set to me becomes mine. If I choose to make it public, it's my right as the reciever. Yes, I have to give credit to the author, but when that "send" button is pressed, it's published.
"Whatever you are, be a good one." ~ Abraham Lincoln
Mtn Gramma wrote: I think that the recipient of a PM should have the option of making it public. Perhaps then senders would be a bit more civil.
I AGREE!! I don't know why the rule is that you cannot... But I think if you posted the message in public, I should think it would have the desired effect of STOPPING it very quickly...
I agree as well. The policy of not being able to post a PM in the forums is enabling the whackjobs that want to threaten and attack, but don't have the balls to do it in a public forum.
As far as I'm concerned, a message set to me becomes mine. If I choose to make it public, it's my right as the reciever. Yes, I have to give credit to the author, but when that "send" button is pressed, it's published.
Yes, plus inquiring minds want to know :woo hoo:
The left is angry because they are now being judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
Seriously, you don't think your private messages should have some level of privacy?
Then we should just shut down the PM system and have a PM forum. There would be no need for private messages. The system is here as a courtesy just like Gmail or other sites like FB that has a PM system but it makes it possible to contact people in the community without having their email address. And you know them through the forum.
PC, I am not bashing you here it is just that they are a perfect example of the many, many people that have been banned. They cannot use the PM system to contact people about business, etc. in the community. That is one of the great, helpful things about these forums in a community.
And there is a Preference setting to not receive PMs as well.
Yes, plus inquiring minds want to know :woo hoo:
