|
PM Multiple Users
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
29. July 2007 @ 01:27 |
Link to this message
|
|
How about this then? Say you want to PM the same message to all mods, or admins, or a select group of users then you have to do it all indivudally.
What I prepose is a system where, at the first PM screen, you can seperate multiple users nicks with a comma and it will send the PM to all said users.
Would be useful IMHO.
Any thoughts?
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
I hate titles
35 product reviews
|
29. July 2007 @ 23:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
"Too easy for PM spammers" comes to mind.. I somewhat fail to see the usefulness of this feature, even tho I agree that sometimes it makes sense to send the same PM to multiple users. But, what others feel, should this be implemented?
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
30. July 2007 @ 00:58 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
"Too easy for PM spammers" comes to mind..
Yes, you're right, I overlooked that. Being probably the only major flaw, it could probably be overcome if it was made available to say member status or above?
|
|
aabbccdd
Suspended permanently
|
2. August 2007 @ 00:18 |
Link to this message
|
|
i think it would be missed used to with spammers or like this week when my shoutbox got attacked by 5 or 6 members within an hour or so(they could get the message out to everyone to hit/attack a shoutbox etc. at the same time) so no it wouldn't be a good idea
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 2. August 2007 @ 00:52
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
2. August 2007 @ 02:16 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
(they could get the message out to everyone to hit/attack a shoutbox etc. at the same time)
Yes because that's deffinitely why I wanted it implemented abcd.. >.<
Anyway, you're entitled to your opinion.
|
Senior Member
|
2. August 2007 @ 03:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
Um. I like this idea, but I am also thinking about the spammers, although I dont think anyone will bother to spam me, we could try and make it harder for spammers to spam many people by-
limiting how many users you can send a message to at the same time to like 5 or 4.
We could also have that "Bot" check thing, where you have to enter a code seen in a picture (but thats only if you send to more than 1 users) Sorry but I dont know what the correct term for that bot check thing is.
I am sure we can think up a nice system that works for the "good-guys/gals"
"He who asks is a fool for five minutes, but he who does not ask remains a fool forever." - Chinese Proverb BluRay.
|
|
mrmcman
Suspended permanently
|
12. August 2007 @ 13:40 |
Link to this message
|
|
This is a good idea. To eliminate spammers, we should make it accessable to only seinors and above, because spammers could get 100 posts (member status) easily in 2 hours, by, well, spamming. And, only experienced members (other than spammers) would want to mass PM people something, if at all. But, still, if a spammer works his way up to senior, which they eventually will, it should be limited to 6 or 7 people at a time.
(+[__]%) put this psp in ur siggy. just do it.
PSP Firmware: constantly changing, currently GoldenEye.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
13. August 2007 @ 00:53 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yeah, I think it'd only really be useful to say Senior and above anyway. Reason being by the time you're a senior, you probably know enough people and have important enough things to send a mass PM about.
And I know spam might be an issue, but personally, I've never been subject to PM Spam..
|
Moderator
1 product review
|
22. August 2007 @ 13:26 |
Link to this message
|
|
Although I don't really have a need for this feature I think it could be a beneficial networking tool. I've never been spammed via PM and my shoutbox has only been claimed by a spammer on one occasion that I can remember. Honestly, I think the spammers target the open forum and don't seek out individual's via PM or shoutbox. What aabbccdd says isn't spam, but rather a malicious attempt to rattle ones cage that would/could happen with or without this feature.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
22. August 2007 @ 13:27 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
but rather a malicious attempt to rattle ones cage that would/could happen with or without this feature.
May I add that no one I know or associate with would be guilty of!
:lol:
|
Moderator
1 product review
|
22. August 2007 @ 13:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
I don't see anyone in this thread accusing you of anything Ripper...do you have a guilty conscience? :D
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
22. August 2007 @ 13:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yes, I do. I also have about 7 other personalities.. would you care to meet the pure asshole variant? LOL x)
|
Moderator
1 product review
|
22. August 2007 @ 14:39 |
Link to this message
|
|
I already have. :)
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. August 2007 @ 17:33 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Ripper:
Yeah, I think it'd only really be useful to say Senior and above anyway. Reason being by the time you're a senior, you probably know enough people and have important enough things to send a mass PM about.
And I know spam might be an issue, but personally, I've never been subject to PM Spam..
the only thing i see worng with this statement is, not having the status of SR or better doesnt mean you dont know enough or enough people to send things in mass PM's...for instance look at the likes of docTY. he is a AD Addict under kivory666, but under docty he's just now a member. so he wouldnt fit in this classafication not being a SR memeber.
im sure there are others that i dont know of that have 1 or 2 hidden screen names that this would aply to...just my 2 cents..
|
Moderator
1 product review
|
22. August 2007 @ 17:53 |
Link to this message
|
|
I think the rank of senior may be a big high to disallow this feature, but maybe, if you have to turn it off for any group would be newbie. I really don't see the need to hedge from anyone...the bad seeds would be weeded out eventually anyway and thus wouldn't have access. Becoming any rank is pretty easily obtainable anyway the way the system is set up.
|
|
aabbccdd
Suspended permanently
|
22. August 2007 @ 23:54 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
What aabbccdd says isn't spam, but rather a malicious attempt to rattle ones cage
well i been to hell and back in all my years of life and a bunch of Punk/Goth/Satanist kids aren't going to rattle my cage in anyway shape or form. if they think they are all there doing is fooling there selfs and making there selfs look stupid lol. i mean this is a website not real life
Quote:
May I add that no one I know or associate with would be guilty of!
more false imformation ^^^ AND for preventive maintenance there would be no need to get defensive about my statement if your statment is correct right lol
bottom line this is a bad idea and is never going to be implemented
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 23. August 2007 @ 00:25
|
Moderator
1 product review
|
23. August 2007 @ 04:05 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
well i been to hell and back in all my years of life and a bunch of Punk/Goth/Satanist kids aren't going to rattle my cage in anyway shape or form. if they think they are all there doing is fooling there selfs and making there selfs look stupid lol. i mean this is a website not real life
That statement proves that your cage has been rattled...I'm on your side here, but you've got to admit your buttons are easily pushed and most regulars here know which ones to push.
|
Moderator
|
23. August 2007 @ 05:14 |
Link to this message
|
all that's needed....
Main PC ~ Intel C2Q Q6600 (G0 Stepping)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3/2GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-8500/Zalman CNPS9700/Antec 900/Corsair HX 620W
Network ~ DD-WRT ~ 2node WDS-WPA2/AES ~ Buffalo WHR-G54S. 3node WPA2/AES ~ WRT54GS v6 (inc. WEP BSSID), WRT54G v2, WRT54G2 v1. *** Forum Rules *** |
|
aabbccdd
Suspended permanently
|
23. August 2007 @ 10:02 |
Link to this message
|
|
breath lol
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 23. August 2007 @ 10:45
|
Moderator
|
23. August 2007 @ 10:09 |
Link to this message
|
|
Here we go again (bangs head on desk); do we have to have this every time, it's just the internet ?. Plus i didn't see anyone mentioned until you (aabbccdd) jumped in the air and shouted "they're getting at me" ie from nowhere you found a placcard and put your name on it, no-one else did.
It's obvious the piccy in my previous reply was a wasted effort (as usual). What happened to the restraint you were going to use ?
edit- i see what's happened here - you misinterpreted this "What aabbccdd says isn't spam, but rather a malicious attempt to rattle ones cage that would/could happen with or without this feature." as an attack. It isn't an attack, it's an example..
Main PC ~ Intel C2Q Q6600 (G0 Stepping)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3/2GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-8500/Zalman CNPS9700/Antec 900/Corsair HX 620W
Network ~ DD-WRT ~ 2node WDS-WPA2/AES ~ Buffalo WHR-G54S. 3node WPA2/AES ~ WRT54GS v6 (inc. WEP BSSID), WRT54G v2, WRT54G2 v1. *** Forum Rules ***
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Moderator
1 product review
|
23. August 2007 @ 13:18 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
It isn't an attack, it's an example..
Exactly...I wasn't trying to pull you into anything and tried to diffuse the situation with my follow up. I assure you that I wasn't trying to single you out.
|
