# twickster, what part of "private" don't you understand? **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [September 16, 2009, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330 "2009-09-16T15:29:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 12:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/61 "2009-09-17T12:33:17Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > Wasn’t it as part of one of the **Seven** threads, though? Not everyone reads all ATMB threads, and I don’t think it was obviously marked. Something could be discussed to death in here and 90% of the board might have no clue about it. Well, here is the thread that was spawned by the incident: [Is quoting the contents of a PM against the “rules?”](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=526418) ---
**Author:** ![Idle\_Thoughts](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/838e76/32.png) [@Idle\_Thoughts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Idle_Thoughts)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/62 "2009-09-17T12:46:27Z")
I once got a PM from **Dex**. It had the word “the” in it. _feels like a rebel_ ---
**Author:** ![twickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ec9cab/32.png) [@twickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/twickster)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/63 "2009-09-17T13:35:11Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Not to mention these responses she might have gotten: > > 1. You’re making shit up. > > 2. You’re keeping secrets from us. > > 3. Cite? > > 4. Goodbye, Opal. “Might” have? Almost certainly would have. Frankly, this is the main reason I quoted the PM – no one would have been satisfied with “he said something nasty to me but I’m not going to tell you what it was.” No one. > [@Gfactor](#): > > Well, here is the thread that was spawned by the incident: [Is quoting the contents of a PM against the “rules?”](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=526418) (Which I linked to in my first response, in post #4.) ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/64 "2009-09-17T13:49:25Z")
> [@Sleeps\_With\_Butterflies](#): > > Just so we’re clear because people will want to be sure, there is no rule against using Tuba’s quote as the sig… it was just part of a larger “pattern” that the mods/admins believed the saw? Well, Sleeps, there seem to be conflicting opinions and I _think_ Marley has reversed himself although I cannot be sure. His firmly stated opinion from the thread Gfactor was kind enough to link: > [@Marley23](#): > > **With rare exceptions I’d say it’s never okay to post a private message from someone else**. Whether or not it’s considered a standalone rule here, and I believe it has been, I think it indisputably falls under being a jerk. And that includes any and all PMs from staff. If a mod messages you, it is not “necessary for transparency” to post it and I don’t recall being asked to surrender my expectation of privacy upon taking the position. And frankly I don’t think anybody really needs to be told this. and in [post 22](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11395652&postcount=22): > [@](#): > > As I’ve said before, I believe people have been warned for it in the past, so there’s an understanding it’s against the rules. Both very clear and difficult to misinterpret. This sounds…situational, to be generous. From what I can glean, either a) Marley has reversed his position from 7/30/09 b) This is one of the ‘rare instances’ Marley was addressing on 7/30/09 c) Invisible Wombat’s post on [page 2](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11397295&postcount=87) is currently what is being used as a guideline. It is difficult to tell as the thread sort of fizzled out with a question unanswered. Certainly this is just my opinion, but as it concerns the entire board population I think it would be wise if this ruling were made clear. Preferably in an announcement. Word it however you like, but everyone should be aware that PM’s are not actually ‘private,’ and there is no rule or expectation ensuring privacy on either side although it is strongly encouraged. I understand why you may not want to do so, but if you don’t it’s a fair bet this scenario will play itself out again. ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/65 "2009-09-17T13:53:11Z")
> [@twickster](#): > > “Might” have? Almost certainly would have. > > Frankly, this is the main reason I quoted the PM – no one would have been satisfied with “he said something nasty to me but I’m not going to tell you what it was.” No one. So what? No, really. When has that ever stopped a moderator here from defending their position? ‘I did it that way because it was within the rules to do it that way and it was what the situation called for’ seems fairly standard here. Why should this situation be any different? ---
**Author:** ![twickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ec9cab/32.png) [@twickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/twickster)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/66 "2009-09-17T13:55:06Z")
> [@Syntropy](#): > > Certainly this is just my opinion, but as it concerns the entire board population I think it would be wise if this ruling were made clear. Preferably in an announcement. Word it however you like, but everyone should be aware that PM’s are not actually ‘private,’ and there is no rule or expectation ensuring privacy on either side although it is strongly encouraged. I understand why you may not want to do so, but if you don’t it’s a fair bet this scenario will play itself out again. I agree, on both points (that we should clarify the guidelines, and that if we don’t this issue is going to come up again and again). ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/67 "2009-09-17T14:05:23Z")
> [@Syntropy](#): > > So what? No, really. When has that ever stopped a moderator here from defending their position? ‘I did it that way because it was within the rules to do it that way and it was what the situation called for’ seems fairly standard here. Why should this situation be any different? I would say this is part of an evolving shift towards _transparency_ on the part of the Mods/Admins. We’ve reversed ourselves on decisions over the last 2-3 years, much more than we ever did in the first 5-7 years. We’ve only decided to publish notices about the reasons for banning/suspending rather recently, say the last 3-4 years. And given the dust-up about the banning-changed-to-a-suspension of **seven** , it’s probably better to show all the evidence than to have to go through a week of being nibbled to death by ducks. Just my opinion, not discussed with any other mods/admins. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/68 "2009-09-17T14:22:50Z")
> [@Syntropy](#): > > b) This is one of the ‘rare instances’ Marley was addressing on 7/30/09 It is. I could think of situations where it’s okay to post a PM or disclose its contents, like if a poster needs some help from the SDMB community. I didn’t think of this scenario. In this case, **twickster** gave **DudleyGarrett** a warning and sent him a notification through the PM system, like we’ve been doing for the last few months. He responded to the notification with “shove it up your ass.” To me, that’s really the same as saying it in the thread where the warning was given. I said in the PM privacy thread that I thought there was an understand it’s against the rules. I think the rest of that thread shows a lot of people don’t see it that way. ---
**Author:** ![Ruby\_Slippers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/94ad74/32.png) [@Ruby\_Slippers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruby_Slippers)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/69 "2009-09-17T16:39:24Z")
Why on earth should abuse be kept private just because it was communicated via “private” message? Domestic abuse may occur in private. Does that mean that the recipient of the abuse is under some confidentiality obligation to keep it private? Seems to me that gives the abuser way more control than he/she ought to have or deserves. Do any of you really believe that you should be able to say absolutely anything you want in an unsolicited private message and expect the recipient to respect your “privacy?” ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/70 "2009-09-17T16:44:03Z")
> [@Ruby\_Slippers](#): > > Why on earth should abuse be kept private just because it was communicated via “private” message? Domestic abuse may occur in private. Does that mean that the recipient of the abuse is under some confidentiality obligation to keep it private? Seems to me that gives the abuser way more control than he/she ought to have or deserves. Do any of you really believe that you should be able to say absolutely anything you want in an unsolicited private message and expect the recipient to respect your “privacy?” _sets his stopwatch to count until someone mockingly derides this post as trying to equivocate profanity in a PM with wife-beating_ For what it’s worth, this is how I see it. Waaaaay too much is being read into the ‘private’ part of ‘private message’. Would there be an implicit expectation on confidentiality if a telephone was known as a ‘private caller’? Only two people can hear the conversation, does that preclude one of the parties from telling someone else about the call? ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/71 "2009-09-17T16:44:46Z")
> [@Gfactor](#): > > Well, here is the thread that was spawned by the incident: [Is quoting the contents of a PM against the “rules?”](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=526418) Ah, my mistake; I remembered (wrongly, obviously) that discussion on that was only as a part of the threads the OP in that particular thread mentions. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/72 "2009-09-17T17:55:22Z")
> [@Bosstone](#): > > _sets his stopwatch to count until someone mockingly derides this post as trying to equivocate profanity in a PM with wife-beating_ You know who else equated profanity in a PM to wife-beating? Yeah, you know who I’m talking about! 😃 [sub]c’mon, SOMEBODY had to say it.[/sub] ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/73 "2009-09-18T04:24:56Z")
Twick’s turning out to be a pretty ballsy mod. (And I mean that in a good way :)) ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 7:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/74 "2009-09-18T07:07:07Z")
> [@twickster](#): > > “Might” have? Almost certainly would have. OMG. And what would you have done!!! How would you have handled such a crisis?Please tell… > [@twickster](#): > > Frankly, this is the main reason I quoted the PM – no one would have been satisfied with “he said something nasty to me but I’m not going to tell you what it was.” No one. I call bullshit—again. You just chose to take the easy way out. Another mod would have handled it better. And many have. There was no need to do it. You were just being lazy. I doubt you’re the first mod to be insulted—“Oh, heavens, the vapors!!!”—and you won’t be the last. But your actions have made PM less private. Congratulations. ---
**Author:** ![twickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ec9cab/32.png) [@twickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/twickster)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/75 "2009-09-18T12:31:31Z")
Y’all keep asking for more “transparency” (to use the latest buzzword) in our moderation, and then when we – I – act in ways that make it clear what we’re doing and why, you bitch about that. I honestly don’t think I’ve made private messages less private – that privacy wasn’t there to begin with. That fact needs to be clarified and added to the FAQs for the forum; the mods are currently discussing the specific wording of that FAQ. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/76 "2009-09-18T13:08:01Z")
But you’ll do it the other way around, right? We can publicize what mods PM to us, right? Do emails count as well? ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/77 "2009-09-18T13:28:54Z")
> [@twickster](#): > > Y’all keep asking for more “transparency” (to use the latest buzzword) in our moderation, and then when we – I – act in ways that make it clear what we’re doing and why, you bitch about that. Since you seem to be unable able to grasp some pretty easy stuff, let me spoon feed it to you. All you had to say was that, “He was insulting to a mod in a PM. And since PMs should remain PRIVATE, that’s all the administration will say on the matter.” > [@twickster](#): > > I honestly don’t think I’ve made private messages less private – that privacy wasn’t there to begin with. Holy shit! Did you really type that nonsense? It seems a logic class is in order: just because said privacy may not have been absolute does not mean your behavior didn’t lessen the degree of privacy one might have previously expected. So, please dial down the bullshit, not UP. But if you’re taking the purely ridiculous position that PMs enjoyed zero expectation of privacy, I’d ask you to reconsider that until you see just how absurd it is. Not that I’m optimistic that with your particular bent you will be able to. > [@twickster](#): > > That fact needs to be clarified and added to the FAQs for the forum; the mods are currently discussing the specific wording of that FAQ. How about: “PMs should remain private. Except if revealing the contents of a PM makes **twickster’s** life a little easier and gives her cover.” ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/78 "2009-09-18T13:36:27Z")
In fairness, Magellan, “Private Message” wouldn’t be the world’s first oxymoron. However, it probably is (or was) the general understanding of most people that private messages would be private, unless they violate some law. Regarding Twicks, the balls are big, but the scrotum may be a mite thin. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/79 "2009-09-18T13:44:49Z")
I think **Twickster** came through her baptism of fire just fine. You’re not a proper mod here until you have the duelling scars. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![twickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ec9cab/32.png) [@twickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/twickster)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330/80 "2009-09-18T13:54:32Z")
**magellan01** , you and I see this differently, and neither of us is going to convince the other. I understand what you’re saying, I just don’t agree with it. **Lib** , yes, the clarification will be a reminder that the sender has no actual control over the content of the message once it’s sent; this will obviously apply to all members, guests, mods, and administrators equally. As I said, the draft of the statement is still in the mod loop right now – it would probably be best to wait to see what the specifics of that are before everyone starts analyzing it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-what-part-of-private-dont-you-understand/510330.md?page=5)