Patreon LogoYour support makes Blue Moon possible (Patreon)

Notice Post count requirement for sending/receiving PMs to be implemented

"incredibly disturbing set of PMs"

That pretty much can be found in countless of conversations between members with special kinks within the site, how would you make the difference ?
Believing that every single report is legit ?

How would you define the barrier between real harassment, relationship disagreement and disturbing roleplay without any context ?

I guess these restrictions are deserved
 
PsionicCuttlefish said:
Aaaand this is why I was of the opinion 5 posts was a biiit much even if such folks are still able to receive and reply to Conversations, but not start new ones...there are a lot of people around who -do not want- any public presence at all, for any number of personal reasons, but usually all boiling down to being uncomfortable about it. And now, for these people, to have it shoved in their faces that they suddenly are -forced- to -make- a public presence for themselves has got to be making them really freaking uncomfortable. :(

Yeah, like, the two people above me right now, case in point. I don't know what their reasons are for not wanting to actually divulge anything about themselves publically. I don't need to know. I empathize with introverts because, while I might seem a bit more outgoing here, I am very much one IRL myself.

For people like this, and like me, being dragged out in the open not on our own initiative just makes us want to clam up harder. It's a much bigger deal than anyone trying to pass this off as "a small, not-difficult thing" thinks it is. :(
Click to expand...

I don't think this is helping anyone either. Not the 5 post thing, but your personification of it. It seems like a gross hyperbole at best. No one is asking anyone to make a big public spectacle. No one is asking anyone what they preferred to be called or what they plan on writing in said pms. It's literally just five posts. A thing that most people who engage on a forum do without thinking on a daily basis. It has nothing to do with personal information or busting anyone's rear-ends. The biggest thing anyone is putting out there is a username. For five posts, that will likely go unnoticed or forgotten within a very short manner of time. This isn't even remotely a big deal and it's pretty baffling anyone would suggest that it is. In fact, it's not even keeping these people from doing what they already are doing for months and months to come, if it takes them that long to make five tiny little posts, because everything they are already doing will remain accessible to them anyway.

This isn't even a mountain of a mole-hill situation. There was a time that the PM-end of the site was quite a handful, systematically. And anything lost in the process of compensating for that was a rock on the backs of all site users, even ones that were entirely comfortable using the forums. The private messaging system and the less social users of this site are valuable in my eyes, and I wouldn't want them to go through the type of thing you describe in your post. I don't see how these measures force anyone to do anything that would be even remotely scary or engage in any activity that would put out more information than they are comfortable with. The only thing gained by blowing up this topic is preventing reasonable attempts at slowing down malicious activities by those who would try to circumvent a ban. Are we supposed to be comfortable with people making new accounts to harass us or people we like because five posts is too much to ask?
 
I have always been uncomfortable with a 5 post limit, I really do not like or want to force people to do something they do not want to do for their own reasons, whatever they may be. But, if you do just make 5 posts in the Introduction section [be it your own or replying to others] none of those will be able to be searched or anything so you're still staying anonymous to anyone who isn't already onsite anyways. So its not as big of an issue in comparison to whats been going on.

We need a measure against people who like to make new accounts every time they are found and banned JUST to harass members, as well as staff members. We have to consider members and their safety first and foremost.
 
Viktoff Samson said:
I don't think is helping anyone either. Not the 5 post thing, but your personification of it. It seems like a gross hyperbole at best. No one is asking anyone to make a big public spectacle. No one is asking anyone what they preferred to be called or what they plan on writing in said pms. It's literally just five posts. A thing that most people who engage on a forum do without thinking on a daily basis [...] This isn't even remotely a big deal and it's pretty baffling anyone would suggest that it is [...] This isn't even a mountain of a mole-hill situation [...] I don't see how these measures force anyone to do anything that would be even remotely scary or engage in any activity that would put out more information than they are comfortable with.
Click to expand...
This, all of this, right here, is the problem. Or well, three-quarters of it I'd say. It doesn't feel like a big deal to you. That's great for you, but you aren't the subject of the situation. You are not considering this from their point of view, you aren't considering how someone else might feel differently about it. The way you are saying all this, you are practically saying that such a point of view cannot legitimately exist, and if that is actually what you meant then that is wrong. Have you ever actually met a chronically-introverted individual? It doesn't sound like you have. (and again, there's any number of -other- reasons why someone might not want to make many posts. For example: Someone who uses this site to keep in contact with exactly one other person and does not use the site for anything else. Just as -one- example out of countless possibilities.)


Viktoff Samson said:
The only thing gained by blowing up this topic is preventing reasonable attempts at slowing down malicious activities by those who would try to circumvent a ban. Are we supposed to be comfortable with people making new accounts to harass us or people we like because five posts is too much to ask?
Click to expand...
And this is the other quarter of the problem. At no point did I say this site should be vulnerable to malicious spammers. In fact, I added another post above specifically to explicitly lay out that this is the case. We absolutely, definitely should take all necessary countermeasures against spammers and harassers.

A 5-post-minimum restriction is not a necessary measure. A 24-hour-wait and a 2 or 3 post-minimum restriction ought to suffice, and even if it doesn't, there are other possible tricks and measures that could be used.
 
^+1

You're arguing rational thought against an irrational aversion. While everything you say is 100% true, and measures should be taken, there are things that can be done without making certain people uncomfortable. Like the 24-hour wait.
 
Mud said:
You're arguing rational thought against an irrational aversion. While everything you say is 100% true, and measures should be taken, there are things that can be done without making certain people uncomfortable. Like the 24-hour wait.
Click to expand...
Mud here just said everything I was saying in an even better and much more succinct form.
 
I think a 24 hour waiting period is a much better idea than this.

Spammers and harassers are a problem, but I don't think that this policy will actually solve that problem. If anything, it'll only encourage more spam.
 
Mud said:
^+1

You're arguing rational thought against an irrational aversion. While everything you say is 100% true, and measures should be taken, there are things that can be done without making certain people uncomfortable. Like the 24-hour wait.
Click to expand...

Internet anonymity isn't enough anymore? I'm a very introverted person, but I'm comfortable here. You've had four posts in this subject alone without introducing yourself, or talking about the things you'd rather keep private. I don't feel like the five post thing is as much of a boogyman as Psionic's post makes it out to be, but it's clear there are plenty of people who do feel it is that way. And if I'm wrong, if my point of view is as narrow as it appears, I wouldn't push my opinion further than I already have.

The very end of my response to Psionic wasn't fair, and I could just edit it out. But, an apology is more of the right thing to do. If I reread the post before hitting the reply button, I would have reconsidered it and likely left it out. It's not a fair representation, not even close and I'm sorry.
 
I'll be setting the requirement to 3 posts shortly.

I'm not too worried as long as there is some guarantee that multiple users notice a person's activity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom