Topic: PM's (Private Messages) - Switch On, please

[Charles2008]

Can I request that PM's are 'switched on' on the SME Forum?

I am not familiar with any SME history on this topic.

I am a member of a number of other forums where PM's are enabled and it is a valuable additional tool in the communication process. I haven't personally come across any down-side.

It would avoid the need for users to have to publish their email address to get in contact with someone. Nobody wants to have to do this.

This would be an improvement over the current situation, I feel.

[hawk]

I agree, please turn on.
thanks
john

[janet]

AFAIR over the years, the policy of the board admin(s) is for PM's to be disabled. Maybe that's because of privacy, spam & additional traffic issues for the main site & other users.

Anyway the ONLY place to request such features to be enabled is in bugzilla, so please open a bug against the contribs org website category. Thanks.

[Charles2008]

Thanks Janet.

Bug opened:
Bug 8299 - Enable PM's (Private Messages) Please

http://bugs.contribs.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8299

[janet]

Charles2008

Take a look for example at the users
Pol1987
and
jader

They have enabled various communication settings which allow you to contact them.

So it's really a case of some users wanting or allowing themselves to be contacted via links in the forums, whereas other users do not add any of those settings, so therefore this implies they do not want to be contacted in those ways.

You can always respond to a thread someone (you want to contact) has posted to & hope they want to reply back to you.

[Jáder]

Hi

As being one of those you can contact because I've provided info, I'd like to say:
   PLEASE DO NOT ENABLE PRIVATE MESSAGES.
ANYTHING SHOULD BE POSTED IN PUBLIC.
This is one of many reasons this community is a good place to discuss our common problems.

Private messages do not solve any problem for group benefit.
If you'd like to talk with someone in private, write a message and ask him for details, or even better, provide your contact info!

Jáder

[janet]

I agree with jader that it is better to publicly "discuss" issues & provide support via forum & bugzilla & mail lists. The info provided is for the benefit of all then.

This has also been a long held view of the long time supporters & developers of sme server like Charlie Brady & Gordon Rowell etc.

[stephdl]

else you could start to talk on irc with a private discussion

as you see, there are  many ways to avoid private forums messages

[Charles2008]

I think that the argument that says   ...   "look at xyz, as they have set up alternative communication arrangements" is self-defeating. The reason that xyz has felt the need to set up and advertise alternative communication methods is in itself a strong argument for formalizing PM's for everyone.

I think that the logic that says 'let's make it difficult for people to communicate' is flawed. This is after all a forum for people to communicate. There are always some things that people would rather say privately 1-to-1. All you do if you disallow PM's, is you either force people off the Forum (via other communication media - irc?) or those communications don't happen.

I believe that enabling PM's is not going to somehow stop people contributing 'on Forum' - The average contribs Forum memeber is very bright indeed and fully understands the crucial role that the Forum plays as a repository of 'Tribal Knowledge'. After all, we have all benefited from it.

By the way (and correct me if I am wrong) those that don't want to avail themselves of the PM service, don't need to. Personally I think that any facility that enhances communications between members is valuable. IMHO communication between interested parties is the backbone of 'Contribs'.

Contribs.org Forum community is weaker - not stronger - because of the absence of PM's (IMO).

[janet]

Charles2008

There are fors & againsts in any discussion.
As I said before re why PM is disabled, "Maybe that's because of privacy, spam & additional traffic issues for the main site & other users", & has less to do with providing additional communications possibilities.
Your comments & arguments for PM should go to the bug report.

If you want a faster answer, then maybe sending an email to admin@contribs.org & asking it to be brought to Shad Lords attention, might elicit a specific answer as to why PM is disabled. You could also pose that question in the bug.

I think that the logic that says 'let's make it difficult for people to communicate' is flawed.

I see no evidence that people (site admins) are deliberately making it difficult for other people (users) to communicate, there are many ways people can do that already.
The reason(ing) for not having PM enabled is probably technical based.

[Charles2008]

Hi Janet,

Perhaps you are right - server overhead / bandwidth etc. Other forums seem to manage it perfectly happily though.

It is a puzzle to me.

Thanks for your reasoned reply.

Would a vote be in order on this?

Anyway, I will wait for a few more opinions before I approach Shad Lords. I don't want to ask for something if the majority are against it. Opinions seem pretty evenly balanced at present in this thread.

[janet]

Charles2008

Usually asking gets the quickest & clearest answer. At the moment a lot of guessing & hot air is going on.

My suggestion was to ask Shad why PM is disabled, not to ask for it to be enabled.

That way you find out why the decision was made & for what reason, not to enable PM.

After that you can then argue the case for/against from a better informed position.

[Charles2008]

email sent   ...   although I would rather have PM'ed him.   

[janet]

Charles2008

email sent   ...   although I would rather have PM'ed him.   

He obviously does not want to receive PM's, and I think that is the point you are missing.
Many others also do not want to receive PM's.

[Charles2008]

FYI
Shad, responded promptly.
He doesn't believe that there is any need to take conversations private.
He also said that the new Koozali website / portal might consider enabling PM's once set-up.