See, that’s fine. PMs can be locked out to all but one or two people (maybe Ed Zotti and jdavis).
The idea of enabling PMs is so that people can still plan Dopefests and do other things not well served by message board posts, without necessarily having to reveal an e-mail address if not desired. If someone still reveals their e-mail address via PM, and trouble later brews, I can’t see it being the Reader’s problem at that point.
I’m spinning around these ideas in an effort to reduce the Reader’s culpability in the event of a meeting between members going wrong.
Need I point out that most of the people in this thread, the ones you are talking about, ARE JUST POSTERS WITH NOTHING TO DO WITH FORMULATION OF POLICY AND ARE JUST TALKING OUT OF THEIR ASSES? Do you pay this much attention to the opinions of your users? Or do you give them only the amount of attention they deserve, noting that some people disagree with this and others disagree with that but because of your contract, your goals, or the law you cannot waste too much time on them?
Yes, the board needs a privacy policy that all admins, mods, AND USERS follow, with clearly defined consequences. I assume that, now that The Reader’s lawyers are involved, we’ll get that in spades. Until that is in place and agreements are signed, I, for one, plan to skip the tantrums that so many here have pulled. We are grownups, most of us, and I expect us to act like grownups. This involves patience, tolerance of people’s fuckups (on both sides of the admin/user divide), and understanding the limitations of rules, how they cannot solve all problems, and need occasional adjustment.
This was an isolated case and was handled poorly at the start. What we need, and what is happening, is a tightening of what was already in place. Keep your shirts on; we’re getting there.
a) In my professional life, I take the security and well-being of my customers VERY seriously. Very seriously indeed, and if you and I were to consider doing business with one another, I can provide you with plenty of reputable people who would say the same of me. In the security world, trust is EVERYTHING, and I have the good fortune of having amassed a good amount of trust, through my trustable actions.
b) In this SDMB issue that involves privacy and security, I have never voiced my own opinions, though I have some. I suspect you can look at what I do for a living and surmise my thoughts on the importance of security, trust and confidentiality.
c) In the area of security, there is a constant recognition that security is never perfect and that resources are not infinite. So, one must make decisions to ensure the best security per dollar spent. Likewise, one must evaluate breaches of security not from the perspective that nothing should ever go wrong, but rather a systematic evaluation of why something went wrong, how bad the damage was, whether the damage was acceptable, and (if necessary) what can be done to ensure it doesn’t happen again. My opinion on the matter at SDMB isn’t really important, but I’m not all that concerned, based on the history of the Admin in question, the history of the person violated, and the surrounding circumstances. I.e. The real question is: “Was what happened here a sign of much bigger problems to come, or was this an aberation with some justification that won’t impact anyone going forward?” And it’s clear to me at least that the answer is the latter.
d) My post in question was about the attitude of some people in our community that I call the “whiners”. They whine about everything. And their favorite complaint always involves being held down by the man. The president screwed me. My boss screwed me. My spouse screwed me. The Mod screwed me. It just disgusts me. These aren’t people who have any serious rational concerns about their privacy being potentially violated; these are people who get their thrills feeling sorry for themselves because some Goliath is stepping on them. I have no respect for these people, and it didn’t start with this issue. Screw them.
e) There are also several rational posters whom I do respect who have spoken out on this issue of privacy, and I continue to respect their opinions. My earlier comments were not aimed at these people.
Yeah, that pretty much sums it up for me. The way this has been handled so far just smacks of “It’s okay, baby, don’t worry. You can trust me.” I’ve known a lot of people who have believed that line over the years, and it’s never really turned out well for them. They’ve wound up with pregnancies they didn’t want, diseases they didn’t want, debt they didn’t want, bruises they didn’t want, and one came damn close to getting criminal charges she didn’t want. Another came really close to getting an eviction notice he didn’t want after his girlfriend cleaned out his bank account and blew town. Call me bitter, cynical, and suspicious, but I’m really leery of anyone who tells me not to worry and just trust them, especially after that person has already shown that they’re not necessarily trustworthy.
CrazyCatLady, what more do you want them to say? We are dealing with good people who screwed up once, not psychopaths, and there is a point at which you need to trust somebody when they say they have learned their lesson and are fixing the problem. The way some guy screwed over your girlfriend has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with this situation.
Jeeze, could you people finally be done with the drama? You made your points a week ago! Quit fanning yourselves into a fury over something that is being fixed as we speak! You do the board no good and you do YOU no good.
For my benefit (because I’m kinda slow), please explain how you expect to get:
a) a disease
b) pregnant
c) debt
d) bruises
e) an eviction notice
e) criminal charges
from the inappropriate actions of an SDMB staff member. Also, please explain why it’s rational to see what happened and suspect any of these could befall you.
You get picked up by a male hooker (presuming yer female), who has herpes… you get pregnant, he demands money for services rendered, you’re broke, so he beats the crap out of you, ‘evicts’ you from the car and you are arrested for jay walking :eek:
Is this a serious question on your part? I think the answer is obvious: If you don’t renew a subscription to a newspaper or magazine, you no longer receive the product. If you don’t renew your SDMB subscription, you’re no longer a member and you won’t have posting privileges. Your particular position on any issue has nothing to do with your failure to renew a subscription. Where’s the mystery?
clarification: what will our title say instead of Charter Member. I realize we can’t post (not that we want to, given that it would show support for the under-reaction on Reader’s part to this mess)
Uh, Mynn: Think it through. If you you can’t post, there will be no “Mynn” beside a post, therefore no name to put “Charter member”, “Non-entity” or any other term under. All you will be able to do is read, if you choose to.
Are you concerned about what it might say under your name on old posts, if someone should do a search?
Ok, if that’s the case, then you put me to work. Sailor was a long-time member here who chose not to continue when the subscription started. A search of his old posts, even going way back, says “Guest” under his name. I suppose it will be “Guest” under anybody’s name that doesn’t renew.
But I’m not a mod, so that’s just a guess. “Guest” is a guess, get it? Shit, that was bad! :o
I’m not saying the admins are going to knock us up and give us STI’s, you numb twit. I’m saying that in my experience, when someone tells you don’t need to have relevant information and should just trust them, they don’t exactly have your best interests at heart. Quite a lot of the time, there’s fuckery afoot.
Maybe TPTB are good folks who had a one-off and this will never happen again. Or maybe they’re folks who can vent their urges toward assholishness any old way they please because there are no real consequences for them. I don’t know. There’s not enough information that hasn’t been disappeared to for me to be able to make that determination. So while I’m not willing at this point to condemn them as the scum of the earth, neither am I willing to believe they’re pure souls struggling mightily to be a beacon of goodness in this naughty world. But still, there’s something about all this that pings my radar in a big, big way.
Considering your comments and your signature, wouldn’t it be even more “big” of you to not post at all, going cold turkey, than this long drawn out charade?
Yes, you’re a paying customer. I understand that. Maybe you want to get your full year in, I don’t know.
If a product sucks in real life so much that you’re willing to tell all your friends not to use it by word of mouth, you generally don’t keep using the product, unless you have no other option. And if SDMB is your only option… what are you going to do in April? Unless you think you can read threads and not have any desire to post in them – more power to you.
But I don’t have much sympathy for those who oppose renewing – and make it public in a signature, in your case – but see no qualms with their continued presence here until April, suggesting one of the following a) you need this product more than you think b) you’re bluffing and/or will “get over it” c) you want your full year’s worth – which saves you like $0.60 or something absurd d) you want to make sure your opinion is heard, which I can understand.
I just think saying this is my last post EVER, goodbye, is a helluva lot more of a statement than “I’ll leave. Gimmie a few months. But I really hate your product, but not enough to stop using it!”
Really, I’m reveling in the irony of it all. There is understanding for you, yes, but no sympathy. Sorry. Just trying to be honest.
Shadez - take a look at my recent post history, and no, not until April. Sorry to disappoint. Yes, I’m still lurking and contributing to the discussion - I am eternally hopeful Reader will switch its corporate brain back on and dump the slap-on-the-wrist punishment, removing the compromised Administrator from that role permanently.
The way threads have been dissappeared lately, I have zero confidence that if the current scenario does change, a casual occasional pop back will make it completely unobvious to said casual occasional lurker.
I’ve heard it said, in this or one of the other multitudinous threads, that an overly strict privacy policy would make it impossible for moderators to do their job, in particular when it came to bannings. This shouldn’t be a problem, in my opinion – because 98% of bannings come from things people said in a particular thread. All the mod has to do is say, “So-and-so is banned because of what he said (here) and (here) and (here).” After all, once you make a public statement, it is NOT protected by privacy laws!
As for socks, spammers, returning trolls, etc. – well, I’m sure the user agreement itself could be amended to make it clear that these particulars aren’t covered by the privacy policy either, should it come to light that a user is breaking one of these rules.
