Curry Recipes Online
Curry Chat => Talk About Anything Other Than Curry => Topic started by: George on April 09, 2015, 10:22 AM
-
Why not send George a "PM" then he can post your PM it in the
forum for all to read. Add that to the selected deleted posts
(they won't be in his log)
I stopped posting a while ago because of this guy.
Is it rude George, OR, is it Fact ? A pm is as it say's, a "Private Message" ;)
It's an interesting question. It may be a year or two ago, but I think I must have upset Graeme by copying a PM he'd sent me, to the main forum. I forget the details but I guess the message was a bit negative or something, and I thought I'd let others know about the type of messages that a moderator can receive. I'd never publish a PM which included anything confidential but Graham's message wouldn't have come into that category. Graeme dragged up this footnote of history yesterday, rather than moving on. He even says it's the reason he stopped posting to the forum. How can that be credible? I ask you.
Anyway, I suggest people should not write anything which they'd be ashamed of, if it's showed to others. What do you think? CH has sent me a few messages with elements which are arguably abusive. Should I copy those to this thread or suffer in silence?
I opened this thread rather than de-rail the off-topic thread. It's my response to the accusations in the quotes above. I seldom start criticising people out of nowhere, but I think I'm entitled to respond to accusations and attacks made on me.
-
No, I don't think private messages need be kept private, so long as there is agreement by both parties that a part or all of the content can be made public. But clearly it is very wrong to disclose any part of the content of a PM without the agreement of the other party -- it is a "privileged communication (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/privileged+communication)", and must be treated as such.
** Phil.
-
it is a "privileged communication (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/privileged+communication)", and must be treated as such.
Thank you for your input but who says that messages on this forum come under the same rules as described within the legal web page?
-
Thank you for your input but who says that messages on this forum come under the same rules as described within the legal web page?
"Rules are for the guidance of the wise, and for the blind obedience of the foolish". Having had the pleasure of meeting you and dining with you, George, I know you to be a sensible chap; so why not save yourself a great deal of anguish and allow yourself to be guided by these rules rather than beating your brains out seeking to establish whether, sensu stricto, PMs come within their aegis ?
** Phil.
-
it is a "privileged communication (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/privileged+communication)", and must be treated as such.
Thank you for your input but who says that messages on this forum come under the same rules as described within the legal web page?
Who says that posts from five years ago must be edited?
-
They are PRIVATE messages, the clue is in the name.
So no shouldn't be posted on here without prior consent of the other person, and I would suggest, your co-moderator.
But you just carry on doing whatever you like George, as always.
Oh and by the way Graeme didn't say he stopped posting to this forum because of that, he said it was because of you personally.
-
I'm now wondering where the term 'private message' came from on here. The main button says 'messages'. The term 'personal messages' is also used in terms of the web page name but you could easily miss it. On the one hand, I think Graeme's message is probably the only one I've published, so in general I respect the rights of the person who sends the message. But especially in the case of abusive or insulting messages, I never agreed to keep them private, and nor did anyone else, as far as I'm aware.
-
I'm now wondering where the term 'private message' came from on here. The main button says 'messages'.
I do not know to which button you refer, George, but when I click on your name one of the options I am offered is :
Actions
Send Personal Message
If I were click on that message, then I believe that I would every reason to believe that the message so sent would indeed by private, regardless of content. Of course, if I were to indicate within such a message that I were planning to overthrow HMG by force, or carry out some other act of sedition or treason, then I could not be /100/% certain that you might not feel obliged to disclose its contents to the powers-that-be. But apart from such unlikely circumstances, I would indeed expect it to be treated as private, even if the exact appellation used on this forum is "personal".
** Phil.
-
See here George,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_message (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_message)
-
See here George : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_message (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_message)
Hmm, not exactly coherent, is it Les ? Personal message, often abbreviated as PM, is a private form of communication between different members on a platform. It is only seen and accessible by the userbut I think message andy'ss participating in the message.
A little editing might make it more useful, IMHO ...
** Phil.
-
See here George : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_message (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_message)
Hmm, not exactly coherent, is it Les ? Personal message, often abbreviated as PM, is a private form of communication between different members on a platform. It is only seen and accessible by the userbut I think message andy'ss participating in the message.
A little editing might make it more useful, IMHO ...
** Phil.
Agreed, but it gives the general gist of the meaning, Personal message, " is a private form of communication", or am I reading it wrong?
-
I'm now wondering where the term 'private message' came from on here. The main button says 'messages'.
I do not know to which button you refer, George, but when I click on your name one of the options I am offered is : send personal message
The main button is on the main menu, together with help, search, etc. It simply says: messages.
Unless it's spelled out and agreed to, I don't accept that 'messages' or 'personal messages' are necessarily private messages. I must have thought it was in the public interest to publish Graeme's message. Either way, what's the big deal? Some folks are too easily offended.
-
Either way, what's the big deal? Some folks are too easily offended.
No George, not offended, But you are betraying a members trust. If that means nothing to you, then hang up your Mod apron, You have no place here. Other than that, Take it up with Admin, Then let us know the rules.
-
All private messages are, in my opinion, confidential and this should not be breached without the author's consent. I also believe you have breached CH's confidentiality by naming him as sending particular messages.
-
And even your best mate Phil agrees with Les & Steven, so that may give you a clue as to which of us is more likely to be mistaken in our beliefs regarding confidentiality ...
** Phil.
-
Either way, what's the big deal? Some folks are too easily offended.
No George, not offended, But you are betraying a members trust. If that means nothing to you, then hang up your Mod apron, You have no place here. Other than that, Take it up with Admin, Then let us know the rules.
Here we go - the first personal attack (by Les). I urge members not to take Les' post as the green light for turning this thread into another big argument.
I doubt if Admin could be bothered with such trivia. If offence doesn't come into it, then why would anyone stop posting? Perhaps to buzz off to a lesser forum? Then they come back and blame me. Perhaps he wouldn't risk sending me another message, but to deprive everyone else of whatever ideas he has on BIR cooking - how can it make sense? It doesn't.
-
All private messages are, in my opinion, confidential...
Maybe in general, but messages on this forum are not described as 'private'.It was my mistake to use the word 'private' in the thread description. Neither did the message come with wording like 'private and confidential' or 'in the strictest confidence' so I don't accept your argument.
-
Some folks are too easily offended.
I can't believe you just said that. You do walk into these things don't you :D
-
George, please read, and inwardly digest. (if that's possible)
Personal messages (or PMs for short) are like posts, but instead of being posted in a topic they are sent to one or more members. Typically, personal messages are private correspondence and they are viewable only by the sender and intended recipients,
And if you think my thread is a personal attack on you, then delete it, makes no difference to me, I will have the same opinion of you anyway,
-
I doubt if Admin could be bothered with such trivia.
Well, let's look at the Terms and Conditions, George (selectively sampled, to keep the length of this message within reasonable bounds) :
Terms and Conditions of Membership
3. You will not post anything which is ... an invasion of personal privacy ...
I.e., you may not disclose something sent to you in confidence (e.g., a personal message)
5. You will not post any copyright material, unless you are the copyright owner or you have written consent from the copyright owner
Copyright is vested in the sender of a personal message, not in its recipient.
9. You will otherwise do nothing that is harmful to this Forum, compromises the integrity of this Forum, or otherwise brings this Forum into disrepute
No comment needed.
15. Understand that when you post here ... you may not remove your content without permission from the site owner.
Please note.
** Phil.
-
Thread over as far as I am concerned Phil.
-
Would like to hear from CH on this subject, just to get his opinion.
Other than that, Cannot be bothered with this thread anymore, George will do what he want's in the end anyway
-
And if you think my thread is a personal attack on you, then delete it, makes no difference to me, I will have the same opinion of you anyway,
That does raise an interesting question. Let us suppose that Moderator A takes exception to something written in open forum, and uses the "Report to Moderator" button to request that it be moderated or deleted. Can Moderator A then don his moderator's hat and delete it, or can only Moderator B carry out such actions in order to avoid any potential conflict of interest ?
** Phil.
-
I would like to consider my personal contact private, I would suggest if this was not the UK George you could find yourself on the end of a A lawsuit.
Lawsuit is a civil action brought in a court of law in which a plaintiff, a party who claims to have incurred loss as a result of a defendant's actions. ;)
-
George dear
I PM a number of people for what ever reason
Maybe for advice or general chat or even to slag someone off :)
And the reason I PM because it's just between me and the other person
Surly you understand this
-
Another fine argument youve started George. Plenty of page views. PM from admin incoming "cheque's in the post" - best not publish that one eh?
Or do you have another reason for trolling the forum on a daily basis? Lack of love and human affection in your life??
-
3. You will not post anything which is ... an invasion of personal privacy ...
I.e., you may not disclose something sent to you in confidence (e.g., a personal message)
Nice try but I don't accept that "an invasion of personal privacy" covers messages.
I think some of you have lost touch with reality, or have moved over to 'wind up' mode. For example Little Chilli's suggestion that anyone could be liable to a civil legal action is absolutely absurd. Good luck if anyone wants to try and has deep, deep pockets to fund such a claim. For a start, G may have deprived himself of some fun on this forum in favour of other places, but to blame me for his self imposed deprivation is farcical. The BBC often read out letters sent by suppliers to consumers who are involved in some dispute. If the BBC consider that the supplier has a case to answer they often give the firms' name as well - name and shame in effect. They wouldn't be able to read out such letters, presumably, if the Courts took a dim view of anyone 'publishing' (unsolicited) private correspondence. Going further, G's message to me could be classified as junk mail. Anyone taking conventional junk mail to a recycling centre where it can be freely read (if anyone was crazy enough) would be running a risk if any of your serious concerns were valid.
-
3. You will not post anything which is ... an invasion of personal privacy ...
I.e., you may not disclose something sent to you in confidence (e.g., a personal message)
Nice try but I don't accept that "an invasion of personal privacy" covers messages.
That is why I include four T's & C's, all of which I believe you have breached, not just one. You /might/ manage to convince a jury that you were innocent of one of the four charges; to think that they might conceivably find you innocent of all four just flies in the face of reason.
** Phil.
-
Oh dear, George.
I really think you have completely relinquished the fingertip hold which you held on the plot!
Perhaps this thread should be renamed 'Must private messages to a moderator be kept private'; in which case the answer has to be yes. Moderators should be seen to be impartial and any messages sent to them should be treated with confidentiality.
I really think you would enjoy this forum, and indeed life in general, more, if you resigned and just became a member :)
-
George, in all the replies so far has anyone agreed with you on this?
Don't you get it, it is just wrong to publicly post someones PM's.
But it is us that has lost touch with reality?
Like I've said before, probably a waste of time trying to reason with you, you will never change.
-
Would like to hear from CH on this subject, just to get his opinion.
Other than that, Cannot be bothered with this thread anymore, George will do what he want's in the end anyway
I'm afraid i find myself in agreement with everybody except the OP. However you wish to interpret the PM, it is a communication / exchange that takes place outside of the forum boards, for whatever the reason and there could be several valid reasons for this. As such i would not expect to see the content of my PM posted to member A posted in a thread. If a PM's content is not for the eyes of other members in the first place, that's how it should remain.
CH has sent me a few messages with elements which are arguably abusive. Should I copy those to this thread or suffer in silence?
Not me guv :o . Someone must have logged on to my computer while i was away ::) . No abusive PM's sent by me to you George. Just checked other than my reference to your "symbolic" thread which i chose to rename to "shambolic".
You did omit that i have also PM'd you suggesting you should alter your wording in a post as it could easily be misinterpreted by some members, which you duly did. It's alright, you don't have to thank me :)
I don't think I have any more to say on the topic as most of you members have really said it all.
Happy currying those that cook ;)
-
One more question :)
George do you think several members are wrong
And you are right
Please answer yes or no
Or are you bluffing !
-
CH has sent me a few messages with elements which are arguably abusive. Should I copy those to this thread or suffer in silence?
Oddly enough, I do think that that is one of the rare situations where public disclosure could be justified. If a moderator is unfortunate enough to be on the end of an abusive PM from a forum member, then he or she should be entitled to forward the PM to his or her co-moderator and see if he/she agrees that it is abusive. If both agree, then they can take a united stance to deal with the offender, copying Stu. in if necessary. But if a moderator feels that he or she is receiving abusive PMs from his/her co-moderator, then to whom should he/she turn ? I think in those circumstances the recipient is entitled to "go public" with the putatively offensive PM and seek support from his/her fellow forum members. What do others think ?
** Phil.
-
No I don't agree Phil, I think that these messages should be dealt with internally.
-
No I don't agree Phil, I think that these messages should be dealt with internally.
That would be fine if there were three or more moderators, Stephen, because then there would be one or more independent moderators to whom to turn for support; but when there are just two, to whom should CH or George turn if they receive what they perceived as abusive e-mails from their fellow moderator ?
** Phil.
-
Phil it can't be worse than what he gets on the forum ;D
-
I've just had a call from Team GB looking for someone for the Back Peddling event at the 2016 Olympics? Any ideas anyone?
-
No I don't agree Phil, I think that these messages should be dealt with internally.
That would be fine if there were three or more moderators, Stephen, because then there would be one or more independent moderators to whom to turn for support; but when there are just two, to whom should CH or George turn if they receive what they perceived as abusive e-mails from their fellow moderator ?
** Phil.
Yes I agree Phil but I think that's another issue.My response was based on what I consider to be appropriate principles to the governance of PMs. The issue of what to do about them is another thing and certainly the limited number of mods does make that a difficult decision for them. However I don't think outing the sender is good for the forum. Goodness knows we have enough bickering here as this thread shows.
-
One more question :)
George do you think several members are wrong
And you are right
Please answer yes or no
Or are you bluffing !
Yes, I'm confident I'm right and most of the others are wrong, from a legal standpoint.
For anyone silly enough to even hint at legal action, I suggest that many of you should look closer to home. Anyone that has published a recipe here, taken from a book, is running a real legal risk for copyright infringement. I'm surprised there's only been one or two approaches from publishing houses, if I recall correctly, if that.
-
Yes, I'm confident I'm right and most of the others are wrong, from a legal standpoint.
And from a moral and/or ethical standpoint ?
** Phil.
-
I've just had a call from Team GB looking for someone for the Back Peddling event at the 2016 Olympics? Any ideas anyone?
That made me laugh bud. Apart from the obvious, can I nominate all the leaders of the parties contesting the upcoming General Election?
On which point, this is funny if you haven't seen it yet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPgS7p40ERg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPgS7p40ERg)
-
On which point, this is funny if you haven't seen it yet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPgS7p40ERg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPgS7p40ERg)
Credits
Creative Director - Stu Outhwaite, Ben Middleton, Ed Warren
Creative - James Mitchell
Strategist - James Mitchell
Agency producer - Madeline Smith
Account team - Dan Shute, Katrina Ellis
Client - The Green Party
Director - Johnny Hopkins
DOP - Denzil Armour-Brown
Production company - ACNE
Producer - Barty Dearden
Music Company - Eclectic
Composer - Colin Smith
EP - Ben Clark
Post House - Unit
Post Producer - Ross Culligan
Colourist - Simon Astbury
2d - Rich Greenwood, George Rockliffe, Vicki Gordon
Audio Post Production - Factory, Dan Beckwith
Editing - Marshall Street
Editor - Gary Forrester
So it wasn't cheap to produce then; ah well, at least it wasn't my donation they were wasting :)
** Phil.
-
Probably cost a lot less than the other parties have spent on their election campaigns, Phil, by some margin.
By the way, I am in no way endorsing the Green Party - just found it amusing :)
-
Probably cost a lot less than the other parties have spent on their election campaigns, Phil, by some margin.
All of which is completely wasted the instant any of them open their mouths.
By the way, I am in no way endorsing the Green Party - just found it amusing :)
I used to be Green, when they cared about whaling and so on, but as soon as I detected the slightest whiff that they might want to penalise my use of a 5 1/2 litre AMG Mercedes I was off like a shot ! But more seriously, none of the parties will get my vote -- I loathe and detest the way that none can see any merit in the viewpoints of the other parties, and as soon as one starts banging the party political drum on a Radio 4 programme I shout "Oh for ****'s sake shut up" and switch over to Radio 3 ...
** Phil.
Oops, sorry, this should be in "Off-topic replies"; I will move any follow-up to there.
-
Probably cost a lot less than the other parties have spent on their election campaigns, Phil, by some margin.
By the way, I am in no way endorsing the Green Party - just found it amusing :)
Its just been on as a party political broadcast for which I switched off as soon as the singing started. :-\