Forum Posts Feed
Any way to PM users here?
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Posted by Ken
Dec 12, 2018 at 07:13 PM
Paul Korm wrote:
Excellent, Chris. Editng spelllling mystakes gets my top vote! Thank
>you for this forum and everything you do for this community.
>
I concur.
—Ken
Posted by Ken
Dec 12, 2018 at 07:17 PM
tightbeam wrote:
I’m against a separate forum that would act as a drain on discussions
>here. A PM feature is not important to me, and probably not to most
>others. It sounds shiny now, but how much use would it really get?
>Certainly not enough to justify me having to check this forum and some
>new forum in order to get full value on the discussions.
While I probably would not use the PM feature much, I am not as concerned about it being a drain. Many forums I frequent have PM features so folks can have OT or private conversations, and I have not experienced much drainage there. I trust the folks around here to keep discussions for “the good of the order” in the forum. I think the question is how it is implemented as to its usefulness in the long run.
—Ken
Posted by washere
Dec 12, 2018 at 08:11 PM
I think when tightbeam opposes a “separate forum”, it does not mean private messaging here, but the chat room/separate forum platform such as signal/telegram as suggested here earlier.
Discussions would be bifurcated. Would have to read everything on both cyber locations just to make sure. Increasingly we’re all short of time these days, I can’t read half the threads here, nvm somewhere else. Also splitting up ongoing discussions on topics on two sites/chatrooms would not be as fruitful, nor handy in archives.
Posted by Donovan
Dec 12, 2018 at 08:51 PM
washere wrote:
I think when tightbeam opposes a “separate forum”, it does not mean
>private messaging here, but the chat room/separate forum platform such
>as signal/telegram as suggested here earlier.
>
>Discussions would be bifurcated. Would have to read everything on both
>cyber locations just to make sure. Increasingly we’re all short of time
>these days, I can’t read half the threads here, nvm somewhere else. Also
>splitting up ongoing discussions on topics on two sites/chatrooms would
>not be as fruitful, nor handy in archives.
You might be right. It was never my intention to step on the toes of Chris, our able forum host, but to lessen any stress for PM’s here. But, as one who is trying to simplify my own digital life, the points made in resistance to this idea are well-taken.
I had to laugh at Alexander’s point that the forum has a Chatham House vibe. I agree with that 100%. It makes for open discussion, and again, point taken. No doubt that many here don’t want to be “public” with who they are because it’s a bit like discussing what machinery should be used at the factory, being able to try and discuss, make mistakes, explain them, try something else, rinse and repeat. It’s a perk that it is all done without the knowledge of who is actually behind the username (and I suspect more than a few here are fairly well-known in their craft).
Posted by washere
Dec 12, 2018 at 09:37 PM
Yes, Chatham rule, as long as the old colonies’ subjects are kept blissfully happy. The Non-Attribution rule guidelines, also the rule in the more honest cousin, CFR. Both are hyped and essentially waste of time these days. Still, the method brings out honest opinions.