Proposed Rule regarding PMs

[Bobby]

I lean heavily towards exactly that position.
Any Rule I impose on this will only have effect from when it is introduced.
Earlier PMs are....well.....not covered by any Rule as no prior EL addressed the issue.

So that would give you a license to post any PMs from the last 10 years or more?

There is no Rule stopping that happening. You could have introduced one but you didn't and neithe did those who came before you as EL.

But, having said that, I propose, as part of the Rule I will introduce, to put a blanket ban on posting PMs which date prior to the introduction of my Rule subject to one exception I can think of, and that is...if a poster makes a claim of fact on Forum which contradicts something that poster has said in a PM say to 'me,' 'I' am at liberty to post the PM.

I am totally over one Member saying one thing in public which totally contradicts what they have said in a PM. Liars like that may be outed, I propose.

Your thoughts?

Hi Aussie,
I deleted all my PMs when I resigned as EL here.
There were over 1,000 of them.
Do you really want to drag up old PMs to try and embarrass or blackmail members here?
Better to let sleeping dogs lie.

[Jovial Monk]

Old PMs will not be covered by the rule.

I deleted my PMs when Larry started the current crap.

[Super Nova]

Deleting PMs doesn't delete them from the recipient.

I have them all since the beginning of time.

[J o h n S m i t h]

My view is:

1. PMs sent here shouldn't be posted in other forums
2. PMs are like emails, therefore should be treated like emails, just because they are called Personal Messages does not mean they are private and protected.
3. A PM sent to another person is no longer the exclusive property of the sender as they have been sent to 1 or more recipients.

Therefore, any PM should be allowed to be posted. Full stop.

It is the judgement of any sender or receiver of a PM if they want to post it, share it to a wider audience.

You should not write a PM if you are not prepared for it to be published in the Age or Sydney Morning Herald.

That works for me.

[Jim Lahey]

Fuckface Jones seems to have the most to hide here.

[J o h n S m i t h]

Fuckface Jones seems to have the most to hide here.

Thats because she lies so often.

[lisa jones]

I am inviting discussion about this. I have an open mind but as there is no Rule here about PMs, no-one at the moment can be sanctioned if a PM is published here.

As a basic generalisation, my own view is that PMs should not be posted, but I can envisage circumstances where arguably, it would be okay.

So.....comments please.

The only point which needs to be made is that under no circumstances should anyone from PA or Ozpol REPEAT the abhorrent behaviour you've demonstrated for months on end wrt PMs.

Or they too will be sacked and subsequently banned

[lisa jones]

Deleting PMs doesn't delete them from the recipient.

I have them all since the beginning of time.

I do too. Super Nova.

[lisa jones]

Old PMs will not be covered by the rule.

I deleted my PMs when Larry started the current crap.

Oh look everyone Jovial Monk is still under some delusion that he's in charge

[Jovial Monk]

No, I am still a Mod.

Bobby will of course resign as Mod since he voted against me remaining a Mod—he cannot now work with me.

When will you resign as Mod, Bobby?