Rule #6: PMs - Clarification/Explanation Needed

[Tattoo Bradley]

Rule #6- This forum has a Personal Message(PM) function. This is for the express purpose of transmitting personal information such as real names, addresses or other sensitive information. This is not a Private Message system as nothing transmitted electronically is ever completely private. Any report of the Personal Message function, or Social Groups function, being used to, or attempting to, circumvent our rules must be treated the same as any post on the open forum.

This rule has bothered me since the new set of rules appeared on the forum. It seems to be a rather indirect and elusive disclaimer allowing snooping of personal* messages.

Under previous ownership/management PMs were only read by:
A. The sender
B. The reciepient
C. A mod/owner IF the PM was forwarded/reported to us. We did not EVER intercept any messages.

At this time are the owner and/or moderators reading, or have they read, PMs sent between two persons without those persons permission/reporting of the messages?

The rule states that PM = Personal Message (as opposed to private.) This is correct, VBulletin defines PM as personal message. However, the rule also goes on to explain that the purpose of the PM system is

::snip::for the express purpose of transmitting personal information ::snip::

Is personal* information not senstive and private**?

Steve,
Please expound and completely clarify this new rule/disclaimer.

*

Main Entry: 1per·son·al
Pronunciation: \ˈpərs-nəl, ˈpər-sə-nəl\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French personel, from Late Latin personalis, from Latin persona
Date: 14th century
1 : of, relating to, or affecting a particular person : private, individual <personal ambition> <personal financial gain>
2 a : done in person without the intervention of another; also : proceeding from a single person b : carried on between individuals directly <a personal interview>
3 : relating to the person or body
4 : relating to an individual or an individual's character, conduct, motives, or private affairs often in an offensive manner <a personal insult>
5 a : being rational and self-conscious <personal, responsive government is still possible — John Fischer> b : having the qualities of a person rather than a thing or abstraction <a personal devil>
6 : of, relating to, or constituting personal property <a personal estate>
7 : denoting grammatical person
8 : intended for private use or use by one person <a personal stereo>

**

Main Entry: 1pri·vate
Pronunciation: \ˈprī-vət\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English privat, from Anglo-French, from Latin privatus, from past participle of privare to deprive, release, from privus private, individual; probably akin to Latin pro for, in front of — more at for
Date: 14th century
1 a : intended for or restricted to the use of a particular person, group, or class <a private park> b : belonging to or concerning an individual person, company, or interest <a private house> c (1) : restricted to the individual or arising independently of others <private opinion> (2) : carried on by the individual independently of the usual institutions <a doctor in private practice>; also : being educated by independent study or a tutor or in a private school <private students> d : not general in effect <a private statute> e : of, relating to, or receiving hospital service in which the patient has more privileges than a semiprivate or ward patient
2 a (1) : not holding public office or employment <a private citizen> (2) : not related to one's official position : personal <private correspondence> b : being a private
3 a : withdrawn from company or observation <a private retreat> b : not known or intended to be known publicly : secret c : preferring to keep personal affairs to oneself : valuing privacy highly d : unsuitable for public use or display
4 : not having shares that can be freely traded on the open market <a private company>

[Hothir Ethelnor]

I would also like to hear about this. It would be a big turnoff if PM's can be intercepted without good cause and/or notification.

It's kinda like being searched without a warrant...

[bricelythgoe]

I have heard of PM's being read by MOD's, although I can not verify that. It would be interesting to here an answer to this.

[Steve Ashton]

Bradley,

You state;

"Under previous ownership/management PMs were only read by:
A. The sender
B. The reciepient
C. A mod/owner IF the PM was forwarded/reported to us. We did not EVER intercept any messages."

This is absolutely correct and remains exactly the same today.


Now let me state this.


We are moving towards a slightly different way of Moderating this forum.

In the past much of what the Moderators did was not seen, or many times not even known about, by the general membership. The Moderators did a fantastic job of keeping the spam and pornography and flaming and Trolling off the forum. The membership had no idea that much of it ever took place and the staff are to be commended for the job that they did. It gave this forum the reputation for being the polite place that attracted the membership that we have today.

But the flip side of this was that there were those who accused the staff of working in secret.
There were those who complained that the forum was governed with a set of morals that were not shared by the membership at large.
There were complaints that the actions of the staff we not adequately explained to the membership as to the reason for the action.

When I took over the forum I made a promise to the membership.
I promised that I would do whatever I could to bring the governing of this forum out from behind any perceived curtain of secrecy. Please note that I say "perceived" because that is what it is. It is just a perception of secrecy where none was actually intended.
I am convinced that if the membership knew of the reasons behind the actions of the staff they would wholeheartedly support those actions. The Staff, past and present, have done a job that they can be proud of and no one should be under the perception that the actions were in any way some "secret club".

To insure the actions of the staff were as transparent and honest as possible I imposed the following guidelines on the staff of this forum.
1) No one will edit another members post without the express written consent of the member.
2) No post or thread will be moved, closed, deleted or other wise have any action done to it without leaving a full explanation behind stating the reason for the action.
3) No deliberation on possible rules violation would take place without a full, and accountable, vote on the issue by the staff.
4) No person would be sanctioned for rules violation without a full explanation to the person involved. This would include a result of the voting.
5) No person would be subject to banning or revocation of their membership without following due process.
And that that process would be fully outlined and explained to the membership before hand. This is why we now have a "Policy for the Resolution of Disputes and Disciplinary Proceedings".
6) No person would be banned or have their membership revoked without the reason posted to their public profile. No one would simply disappear from the forum.
7) That all deliberation and voting be conducted in a timely manner. That means 72 hours max.
8) And the final guideline was that no one persons personal morals or ethics would set or take sway over the entire forum.

To meet the final guideline I have begun to move us towards a policy of "Report Based Moderation".
I know that you, Bradley, know about the "Report a Post" function of this forum software because you have been there, on the other end of incoming reports, but perhaps it is a good time to explain it to our members in full.

To the General Membership-----
This forum software package contains a "Report a Post" function. In the upper right hand corner of every post or thread is an icon of two little flags. Red and Yellow penalty cards to be exact. By clicking on these penalty cards any member can report any post which they feel is offensive, a violation of our rules, or even questionable.
Reporting a post is the way our members bring something to the attention of our Forum Moderators. Our staff cannot be everywhere all the time.
There should be no sense of "Tattletale" associated with reporting a post because this is how the staff will know how and what our members feel about the issues.
We will use what our members feel are the limits of right and wrong behavior on the forum.
We will let our members decide if a post is in keeping with our principal of "The Ladies and Gentlemen of X Marks.

This is how our forum will be governed now. We will expect our members to act as adults. The definition of what is, and what is not, adult behavior will come from our members.

Any report from our members will be treated as just that, a report. The staff will then deliberate and vote on whether the actions reported are an actual violation of our rules or not. They will then do one of two things.
If the report is found not to violate our published rules the post or thread will be returned to its original location and an explanation and the results of the vote attached.
If the report is found to violate our published rules then an explanation and the results of the vote will replace the post or thread on the forum. The offending person will then have full recourse of our published Disciplinary Policy.

This Report a Post feature of our forum will include Personal Messages and emails received by any member.

At any time a member receives a Personal Message or email from another member which they feel is offensive, or a violation of our rules, they are honor bound to report it to our staff.

So, is it possible that our staff may see and become aware of information transmitted via the Personal Message system of the forum? Yes it is. And we will act on those reports in exactly the same manner we would act on any report of any post on the open forum. If anyone attempts to use the Personal Messaged system to circumnavigate our rules they will be subject to the same disciplinary policies.

I hope that our membership will embrace this system of self-governing. We will rely on our members sense of right and wrong not the sense of any one person. And that includes me. I am subject to the exact same rules as everyone else.
And for the record. I do not vote on rules violations except in the case of a tie. This is why we try to always have an odd number of Forum Moderators. So I don't have to break a tie.

I hope that this fully explains what the intent of Rule #6 is and how it will be used.
If anyone has any further questions please post them to this thread.

[Bugbear]

Ok, I think I understand now; it was unclear if I could report someone's post without that other person being told that I am the one reporting the post. I had decided that I would no longer report any posts until that was cleared up; I very, very rarely report a post, though.

This is an interesting aproach, Steve. Sounds a lot like complexity theory.

[BEEDEE]

And to make one point, ABSOLUTLY CRYSTAL CLEAR. The moderators do not have access to, or the abilitly in any fashion, to read or otherwise intercept PM's.

Brian

[Tony]

So.....pretty much the same as everywhere, except it's actually stated in the open.

[Steve Ashton]

Well, Ted, relying on a "Report based Moderation Policy" is the only way to insure that it is our members who will determine if a post is appropriate. Not the ethics or morals of any one person.

Anyone who reports a post, thread, PM or email to the staff will receive an acknowledgment that the post has been received. They will also receive notification of the result of the staff's deliberations. But that is all.

No one has the right or need to know who reported a post or why. That is the decision of the person reporting.

The corollary is also true. Anyone who has had their post or thread reported will receive a notification that the post was reported and that it is under review by the staff.. And that is all. the staff will contact the person involved and open a direct line of communication giving the person their right to be heard.

We will also not post on the open forum all of the details of the deliberations or discussions between the staff and the person involved. Only the result will be published. We will site the rule involved and the result of the voting. No one has the right or need to know all the communication and discussion that goes on to determine if a Rule has be violated. That communication is considered sensitive and personal.

[herminator]

I love to pick a nit:

you will have to "cite" the rule

of this "site"

:beer:

[KiltedKnome]

Oh oh....you have found his weakness - spelling!