# Is quoting the contents of a PM against the "rules?" **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [July 30, 2009, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811 "2009-07-30T21:33:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Promethea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Promethea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Promethea)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 12:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/61 "2009-07-31T12:21:34Z")
Marley23, one of the reasons this whole thing is such a shame is that I think BOTH sides see this as a situation whereby they are being made to conform to higher standards of behaviour than the other. You, for the reasons you’ve laid out in your post but I pretty much feel it is often the same of a poster of this board. I’ve sat back and seen a long string of vicious trainwrecks between mod and posters in which it seems that at BEST there are faults on both sides and yet only the poster is publicly punished, often very severely. The total refusal to even contemplate that TubaDiva has not conducted herself appropriately is the latest such incident. Now, I’m not looking for some kind of pound of flesh - I’ve nothing personal against her or any other moderator. What I’m suggesting is that the way the admins risk coming across across is that they can behave badly in a way that would get a regular poster banned and without consequences. And that further more, this is breeding resentment. If that isn’t the case, it really isn’t clear. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/62 "2009-07-31T12:46:12Z")
Frankly, I’d be satisfied just to get some of my PMs responded to. ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/63 "2009-07-31T12:48:16Z")
> [@Zoe](#): > > There was a thread in which someone (a young woman?), whose name started with a _V_, had her feelings hurt by her minister who was very judgmental about something that she had done. He sent her an email and she brought it to the Straight Dope for discussion. She was very upset and posted his email, I think. The minister _may_ have posted here also. I’m not certain. > > The Doper ended up being banned over it and other Dopers advised not to post from outside mail. I don’t know if this was to include PM or not. > > Sorry that I can’t provide a link. I can barely remember the situation. Apologies for the hijack, just wanted to correct this. No. The Doper was not banned for publishing the outside mail. The doper was banned for sending a link to the Pit thread she started to the pastor she started it about and inviting him here to be eviscerated. He actually handled himself with more grace than he was treated. There’s a link in the compendium at the GB. I’ll PM you. 😉 > [@](#): > > Someone pushed the limits of abuse with me last year in PM at Thanksgiving and then told me not to bother to respond because she wouldn’t be available. I responded anyway, but made an effort to be pleasant. That was insufficient and so I got more abuse. > > If that happens again, I’m just going to send it to an Administrator. (I’ll wait until after the holidays!) As long as PM is sponsored by SDMB, I think they should be aware of who is abusing the privilege. > > Some people are just not happy unless they are hounding others and stirring up trouble. So what do you do when the person abusing the privilege and being a jerk is an admin? ---
**Author:** ![zut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zut/32/2875_2.png) [@zut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zut)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/64 "2009-07-31T12:57:27Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I believe he said that if he gave someone a warning for the contents of a private message, he _expects_ the poster would start a thread to complain about the warning. But if all PMs to staff are private, **Gfactor** couldn’t say what it was that drew the warning. 😉 Clearly, any rule should have a provision that private messages can be posted _with the consent of the sender_. If I send a nasty PM to **Gfactor** , he warns me for it, and I start a thread asking “why was I warned?” then the proper response is: “You were warned for what you said in a private message. If you’d like to discuss it further in this thread, I can post the message and point out the offending parts. Just ask me to do so.” Ball’s in my court, because if I say no, I look like an ass. > [@Marley23](#): > > I’ve asked other mods to weigh in here, but I’ll say now that a one-way confidentiality concept is not going to fly. Communications with mods and admins, including warnings, are considered private. If you want to be able to post anything we say to you, you’ll have to make the same sacrifice. We are not public officials. But there is a power imbalance. If I write a nasty message to **Gfactor** , I get a warning. If **Gfactor** writes a nasty message to me, my recourse is to go to **Tuba** or **Ed** , which may or may not be satisfying. In addition, PMs you (or **Gfactor** ) make _as a moderator_ are presumably representative of board policy, and thus have a more far-reaching impact than my PM calling you (or **Gfactor** ) a doody-head. However, one-way selective exposure in particular cases at the whim of the poster does seem unfair to me. As an idea, I would think that if someone (let’s say **Seven** , just to pick a name out of the air) were to publicly selectively quote a PM from a moderator/administrator, then that constitutes permission for said moderator/administrator to publicly quote from said poster’s PMs _within the same conversation_, if he or she wishes to. That gets rid of any “out of context” complaints. And, to be blunt, if said moderator/administrator thinks he/she will fare poorly if all his/her language to posters is publicly posted, then perhaps he/she should reconsider the language \*before \*including it in a PM (and the same goes for said poster). ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 1:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/65 "2009-07-31T13:00:58Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Do you read other people’s mail and listen in on other people’s phone calls? How is this statement relevant to the discussion? We aren’t talking about “other” people’s mail. We are talking about one party taking something mailed to them and making it public. When I call someone, or when I send them a letter, I never do it with the expectation that it cannot be disseminated to others. How I will feel about having it done will depend upon what type of communication and who the person on the other end is. In the case of a message from a moderator, I can see it being jerkish, and I can see it not being jerkish. As usual, context is key. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/66 "2009-07-31T13:08:21Z")
> [@zut](#): > > Clearly, any rule should have a provision that private messages can be posted _with the consent of the sender_. If I send a nasty PM to **Gfactor** , he warns me for it, and I start a thread asking “why was I warned?” then the proper response is: “You were warned for what you said in a private message. If you’d like to discuss it further in this thread, I can post the message and point out the offending parts. Just ask me to do so.” Ball’s in my court, because if I say no, I look like an ass. Wait a minute. Do you mean it is against the rules to insult a mod or admin in a PM? A PM? Something that nobody else reads? I mean, I can understand no insults on the public board, since it would be a form of revolt and anarchy. But PM stands for _Private_ Message (or so it says in the User CP). So, I think we should be free to blast away in that medium without fear of public repercussion. ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/67 "2009-07-31T13:11:09Z")
Another thing we are not asking is: does the board administration have the ability to read PM’s? Other people’s obviously, not their own. If so, then the work email rule applies: Do not send anything that you don’t want your boss/admin reading and don’t send anything that may come back to bite you on the ass. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 1:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/68 "2009-07-31T13:15:51Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > How is this statement relevant to the discussion? I answered this about 12 hours ago. 😉 I believe I said this already, **Syntropy** , but mods and admins do not have the ability to read the private messages of other users. We’ve got no interest in doing this. ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/69 "2009-07-31T13:18:07Z")
Ah, thank you. I did not see that earlier. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/70 "2009-07-31T13:26:46Z")
Some ideas are starting to shape up here. It seems to me that the best way to handle this is as follows: 1. There is no hard and fast rule. Posting the contents of a PM or an e-mail without sender’s permission is not _per se_ improper. 2. The posting of such contents without permission can be violative of the “do not be a jerk” rule, depending upon the contents and the reason. 3. Staff should not post the contents of a PM sent to them, unless responding to a publically made complaint on the Board by the sender of the PM about the response from staff to the PM. In a more generalized discussion, I suppose the question is whether a PM is more like a written letter, or a form of talking. When I talk to someone, I certainly have no legal reason to expect that the contents of the conversation won’t be divulged. I may be vastly disappointed if the person I considered a friend, to whom I disclosed something personal, then re-broadcasts that to the circle of acquaintances we share. But they are under no legal obligation to me not to do that, and the moral obligation is one that, at best, affects our relationship. I tend to think of PMs and IMs as a form of talking, not of writing. So I think they are best handled with the same approach as if I had said those things to you in person. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/71 "2009-07-31T13:39:05Z")
> [@Muffin](#): > > Communications with my clients are confidential for me. And there are exceptions even to that rule, I assume, for example that your code of ethics has a self-defense privilige like this one from my jurisdiction: A lawyer may reveal: > [@](#): > > (5) confidences or secrets necessary to establish or collect a fee, > or to defend the lawyer or the lawyer’s employees or associates > against an accusation of wrongful conduct. Is that correct? ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/72 "2009-07-31T13:53:49Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > 1. Staff should not post the contents of a PM sent to them, unless responding to a publically made complaint on the Board by the sender of the PM about the response from staff to the PM. \*If \* there was a presumption like that, there’s no way I’d be willing to limit it to complaints made by the sender. Even professional ethics rules permit self-defense, and we often need to defend ourselves from accusations made by third parties. I’d expect to be able to post PMs and emails to defend any claim to which they were relevant. Similarly, we’d need to establish a sword/shield rule. And that really makes it all too complicated for some folks. So I’m still in favor of a bright-line rule, and I’m not in favor of one that’s lopsided. ---
**Author:** ![zut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zut/32/2875_2.png) [@zut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zut)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/73 "2009-07-31T13:54:35Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Wait a minute. Do you mean it is against the rules to insult a mod or admin in a PM? A PM? Something that nobody else reads? I mean, I can understand no insults on the public board, since it would be a form of revolt and anarchy. But PM stands for _Private_ Message (or so it says in the User CP). So, I think we should be free to blast away in that medium without fear of public repercussion. Well, I’m not **Gfactor** , but I do recall **Ed Zotti** saying something about not wanting his staff to be subject to undue abuse. At some point, contents of a PM pass into the land of undue abuse. Where that point is I don’t know, but I can imagine someone opening a thread about it. In addition, I can certainly imagine non-insulting PMs that would be warnable. “Let me post my thread or I’ll hack the board,” for example. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/74 "2009-07-31T14:05:27Z")
> [@Gfactor](#): > > \*If \* there was a presumption like that, there’s no way I’d be willing to limit it to complaints made by the sender. Even professional ethics rules permit self-defense, and we often need to defend ourselves from accusations made by third parties. I’d expect to be able to post PMs and emails to defend any claim to which they were relevant. > > Similarly, we’d need to establish a sword/shield rule. And that really makes it all too complicated for some folks. So I’m still in favor of a bright-line rule, and I’m not in favor of one that’s lopsided. Provide me an example of a situation where the contents of a PM sent to you by party A would need to be divulged in response to an issue publically raised by party B? ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/75 "2009-07-31T14:07:55Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Wait a minute. Do you mean it is against the rules to insult a mod or admin in a PM? A PM? Something that nobody else reads? I mean, I can understand no insults on the public board, since it would be a form of revolt and anarchy. But PM stands for _Private_ Message (or so it says in the User CP). So, I think we should be free to blast away in that medium without fear of public repercussion. The whole point of this discussion is that some are claiming PMs are _not_ private while others claim that they are. It’s not the case that they are both. We are discussing whether they are or not, but I see no reason to permit the PMs to be used as both sword and shield. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/76 "2009-07-31T14:13:15Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > Provide me an example of a situation where the contents of a PM sent to you by party A would need to be divulged in response to an issue publically raised by party B? Just about any moderator decision where we know additional facts related to the decision that we learned from PMs or emails. It’s often not the subject of the decision who complains. In other cases, the recipient may complain, but others may make other claims which are contradicted by the contents of PMs or emails. ---
**Author:** ![SoulFrost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f07891/32.png) [@SoulFrost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SoulFrost)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/77 "2009-07-31T14:29:57Z")
Just chiming in with my opinion: PMs should always remain private, assuming that they were sent with that expectation. Staff have no expectation of privacy when speaking on matters of board policy or a Member’s status–those are official communications, and as such, they may be made public. **Tuba** ’s PM would fall under that umbrella–simply by fiat of her position, her opinion of **Seven** directly impacted his present and future status. What _is_ a PM? It’s not an email. It’s not a letter sent through the postal system. It’s not a phone call. They don’t belong to the sender, nor to the recipient–they belong to these guys: > [@](#): > > By posting on this board you grant the Creative Loafing Media, Inc., and its successors and assigns a nonexclusive irrevocable right to re-use your posting in any manner it or they see fit without notice or compensation to you. No material contained in this site may be republished or reposted without express written consent of the Creative Loafing Media, Inc., except that message board users retain the right to republish or repost their own work. They’re simply specifically targeted posts. As such, they ought–again, in my opinion–to adhere to (a somewhat relaxed version of) the rules governing any other post. Don’t cuss someone out in PM if you’re not willing to cuss 'em out in public. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/78 "2009-07-31T14:30:55Z")
> [@SoulFrost](#): > > Just chiming in with my opinion: PMs should always remain private, assuming that they were sent with that expectation. … or were sent by **TubaDiva**. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![tacoloco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tacoloco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tacoloco)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/79 "2009-07-31T14:38:17Z")
Yeah, it’ll be doubleplusgood to add yet another rule to the list. ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811/80 "2009-07-31T14:44:33Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > … or were sent by **TubaDiva**. 😉 Can I please suggest you make that official then, the “PMs should always remain private, assuming that they were sent with that expectation.” part, not the **TubaDiva** part. Very few people expect flaming Emails/PMs to remain private. That is not normally a breach of trust. As it is not universal, it is a simple rule to add. Please cover Emails in it too. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-quoting-the-contents-of-a-pm-against-the-rules/504811.md?page=5)