No. The board had the opportunity to either associate PMs with more or less of an expectation of privacy. It, you (pl), evidently chose the latter. That is harm. And Twickster’s completely unnecessary lazy, self-serving action is what sparked it. Funny, I would have though a mod would be tasked with not degrading the board. Consider ignorance fought.
Yowza, talk about thin skin. Better be careful going outside, there might be a light breeze and a particle of dust hurtling your way.
God, kids, come on, now!
Last time I checked, our Dope was in jeopardy of being shut down, and I cannot STAND the thought of that happening!
Can y’all PLEASE “lay down your weapons”?
TubaDiva, I thought you had closed this thread. Am I wrong?
I apologize if I “overstepped my bounds”.
You all are MUCH smarter than me, which is why I come here, so excuse me if I said something wrong.
Thanks!
Quasi
Quasimodem, I mean this in the kindest way, but maybe you shouldn’t read these kinds of threads. You seem to take them a little too much to heart.
I know. I apologize and will get out.
It’s just that Twicks is a bud and so are the rest of you.
I hate discord.
Didn’t used to, did I?
I was a “Ramblin’ Wreck” at one time, huh? 
This will be my last post here.
Thanks, CarnalK! 
Absolutely NO offense taken.
Y’all just work it out.
Quasi
Ahh did you get ur liddle feelings hurt? Oh well–maybe I will send you a PM and tell you what I honestly think of you. Then we can see you keep it private. You must have said some bad things in PM’s in the past that this issue even concerns you.
–Oh, and feel free to know that in general I usually do take your advice and ignore your statements.
Well, if you’re agreeing that PMs can and/or should be policed by the administration and moderators on this board, then it seems logical to me that if someone gets a warning for something in a PM, the contents of the PM need to be revealed to justify the warning. I don’t see a problem. I note that obviously you do, I just happen to disagree with you.
P.S. I also think you are not being very consistent here. PMs are supposed to be confidential except that at any moment my PM can be forwarded on to an administrator? That doesn’t sound confidential to me.
Thanks. That settles that.
It could have been settled, though, with just a wee little bit of careful rewording. Less “you” and more “we”.
You’re still not paying attention.
We couldn’t enforce any instance of the infraction. Not one. Unless the person committing the offense wants us to or is incredibly stupid.
There are masochists out there, y’know. Sadist and masochist sitting on a love seat sofa. Masochist says, “Beat me! Beat me! Oh, please beat me!”. Sadist grins and folds his arms. “No.”
Personal comments are not permitted in this forum. You may express your displeasure with what someone says, but you may NOT make comments about them personally.
Hakuna: Personal insults are not permitted in this forum. Cool it. And, if you are threatening to send obscene or harrassing comments via PM, please note the new rules and DON’T DO THAT.
I initially posted on the grounds that you had raised a serious point and that others might share your views.
Not one poster has submitted anything resembling a similar viewpoint to yours. I am well aware that you are going to hold your position regardless of every other post against yours, so why am I supposed to spend both our times bickering with you on a point on which we fundamentally disagree?
I am sure that you have never repeated any comment heard in a phone conversation, since you could not watch the facial expressions and the body language of your correspondent and phone conections often distort tone of voice, but I am quite sure that everyone else has repeated comments made on the phone and we are probably going to treat matters on the SDMB much more like real life than your (solitary) individal wishes. You are free to continue arguing with all the other posters, of course.
noted–just meant it as a joke. But I can see your point. That is what I get for posting first thing in the morning
This seems to be correct. Imagine that the only way to measure a car’s speed was its own speedometer. So someone could say someone else was speeding, and the only thing the state could do about it is ask the alleged speeder how fast he was going.
Unless they confess, or a cop was sitting in the car with them, the authorities have nothing to proceed with.
I, for one, would not like to have punishments handed out on accusations alone, without any evidence whatsoever. And the board offers the mods no way to gather unequivocal evidence about PMs they didn’t receive or send themselves.
Out of lurk mode…
By “Period.”, you mean 100% of the time, no exceptions? If so, that’s a reasonable viewpoint. But nobody else agrees with you. And it isn’t just one or two people, basically every single person in this thread disagrees with your viewpoint. Poster, mod, admin, all of them. (And since you go on to lay out a case where PMs can be shared, you don’t either.)
At what point do you step back and ask yourself if your viewpoint is as self-evident and universal as you think it is?
A logically compelling argument. Intellectual honesty would demand a change in position.
By “period” I mean as Official Board Policy, enforced by the powers that be. And I see that you are unaware of the Appeal to the Masses fallacy. You may want to look it up. While lopsided numbers may give me pause, they have not convinced me that my position is wrong. It is obvious that that position will not be adopted. That does not mean I’m obligated to change my opinion.
It is plain that it is neither self-evident or universal. Again, while I am obligated to abide by board policy while I am here, I am not obligated to think each and every policy a good one.
Wrong forum. Never mind.
I’m not sure that the fallacy applies, here. “Should private messages be inviolate,” isn’t a matter of objective fact, it’s a matter of opinion. It seems that the majority of the people who both operate and participate on these boards think that they should not be inviolate. While that obviously does not obligate you to change your mind about the subject, it does make your outrage over the subject seem a little petty. This is the way people want the board to work. There’s nothing wrong with it working that way, even if you’d rather it worked a different way.
Um. Can I say that another poster’s position is petty in ATMB? I have to admit, I find the rules about what can and cannot be said in this forum very confusing. Apologies if that oversteps a boundary.
Has anyone asked you to change your opinion? Has anyone said you have to agree with every policy?
You started the thread. You chose to give it a snotty title, and 4 pages in you are still acting like your viewpoint is self-evident. It’s isn’t. Like I said, it’s a reasonable viewpoint. But as Miller said, the Fallacy of the Masses doesn’t apply. If you want to vote for the Green Party, fine. If you think The Beatles were the worst band ever, fine. But don’t open a thread demeaning the intelligence and character of everyone else, or act like everyone who disagrees with you is objectively wrong.
I see no reason why the fallacy should apply only to those issues where an objective answer is available. In fact, that’s when it wouldn’t be needed. One is rather easily proven wrong or right. It’s more useful in debates like abortion, the legal drinking age, or whether a public option for healthcare is a good idea. Just because 60% of the country might feel one way or another about one of those issues does not mean that they hold the right position or that anyone is obligated to change their position to agree with it. Like I said, I am obligated follow whatever policy the board decides on. But I am free to hold that I think the policy to bad ill-thought out, bad, dumb, harmful…whatever.