And why is it locked?Tsoe wrote:The MOD Thread is locked
Whats the purpose of this, buddy. I am not agree with you, its encourge some spam posts.driedfruit wrote:Is a very good idea. However, this could lead you to a situation where you can't reply at all. Would it be nice if that feature was tweaked to allow replies to users who posted you?
I just don't feel right visiting random topics and adding irrelevant comments just to increase my post count.
What do you think?
I guess this could go both ways...narqelion wrote:There are several members who advertise private/paid support services in their signatures, which is the only place it can be, based on your own forum rules... a novice web user has no desire to learn the technical aspects of maintaining the forum but instead just wants to find somebody to do it for them. They browse the board, see a signature offering service and then try to contact them via PM, as usually directed in the sig, but then find out they cannot unless they've made 5 posts.
This restriction does not apply when PMing team members. Users of any post count can contact staff here.eviL<3 wrote:Allowing users to reply to PMs will ensure that they can at least reply to a team member, for example. Allowing users to PM team members should not be a problem either, as we can detect this and place a ban if spam is detected. That would seem like a good compromise.
You learn something new everyday; thanks for the heads up!Marshalrusty wrote:there was enough PM/email spam being sent that it became a concern
I firmly believe that administrators (or, at that most, founders) should have the ability to read a user's PM, so long as they have a really good reason to do so. You cant stop a determined founder from connecting to the database and searching through the PM table. I definitely agree that we could change it to "direct message" or some other variant and notify users that their inbox can (and will) be monitored if there is a need to do so.lurttinen wrote:We could change the term "Private message" to "Direct message" and ad a note in the registration agreement that admin/moderator might be peeking before the delivery.
As Marshalrusty stated, allowing users to offer private support is not something we directly support or aid. As such, it is not really our job to play matchmaker for users who are unable to make five posts on the board We (as team members) tend to get a rather bothersome amount of PMs as it is -- more certainly are not neededA_O_C wrote:You learn something new everyday; thanks for the heads up!Marshalrusty wrote:there was enough PM/email spam being sent that it became a concern
Maybe we could change the notice to say something along the lines of "Due to spam issues, PMs are disabled to users with less than 5 posts. If you are sending a PM to hire someone for work (indicated by the users signature), please contact a team member for assistance." This way, you are catering to what lurttinen correctly pointed out as a small amount of users, but still keeping the restriction in place. Then again, we could just go with the philosophy that you cant please everyone.
The whole point is that if the user's intention is to spam, we will catch it and take action before the threshold is reached and more spam can be sent via PM.Dan27 wrote:Hay well look on the bright side, it might encourage to spam post, but at least it's only 5 posts.
Not completely true if you think that there are users that joined many years ago with less than 5 posts but in need to PM those users for a reason or another.Marshalrusty wrote:users with less than 5 posts should not have any dire need to PM non team members.