mikebse2a3 Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 In one PM conversation I'm having under the participant section the word BLOCK has appeared under the other participant: Example It Looks Like This: Forum Name: Read: BLOCK Why has this appeared for this participant only? Other PM conversations with other participant members this "BLOCK" option doesn't appear. Thanks, Mike 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minermark Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 In one PM conversation I'm having under the participant section the word BLOCK has appeared under the other participant: Example It Looks Like This: Forum Name: Read: BLOCK Why has this appeared for this participant only? Other PM conversations with other participant members this "BLOCK" option doesn't appear. Thanks, Mike Because if you click it you will block that user, they can do the same. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikebse2a3 Posted May 3, 2014 Author Share Posted May 3, 2014 But why does this option show up only on this participant and not other participants I've PM'd with? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sancho Panza Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 Some people choose to turn OFF PMs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikebse2a3 Posted May 4, 2014 Author Share Posted May 4, 2014 Some people choose to turn OFF PMs. Are you saying that if they have PM's turned off it will show up as "BLOCK" under their info as I gave the example above ? This seems to be more an option for me to use as minermark mentions but what I don't understand is why it even showed up in the first place and why it is only showing up on this one member and not on others I have PM's with. miketn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sancho Panza Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 Don't know; perhaps if we knew someone who has PMs blocked? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eth2 Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 (edited) I show Mdeneen as blocked. I have not blocked anyone so I do not understand why that is showing up. Geez, Mark has my Peach and my Blueberry so I hope he is not blocked. Edited May 4, 2014 by eth2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CECAA850 Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 I show Mdeneen as blocked. I have not blocked anyone so I do not understand why that is showing up. Geez, Mark has my Peach and my Blueberry so I hope he is not blocked. I don't think he's blocked. I think that gives you the option to block him if you click it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ssh Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 I think Mark once posted that he has all PMs blocked or turned off. SSH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 (edited) Mark got all paranoid at some point about PMs. Don't know why. While Chad may be able to, moderators can't access them. If you look under his posts, you'll see you can't get at him via PM. I miss having the option to send a regular email as there were times when it was the better option. Don't know why that isn't in the new software. Dave Edited May 11, 2014 by Mallette Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 You know this to be a fact? Other forums I have experience with this is not the case, unless your account is hacked into by an admin or moderator. In which case there would be a record of such and your password would have been messed with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 So my honest question is how do you know they are read by moderators? Names, dates, evidence of privacy invasion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 (edited) Agree with your logic. But who are "they" that told you so? Edited May 11, 2014 by oldtimer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 Mark loves to expose global bankers, power brokers, string pullers, and I am all behind him for it. Should he not name names for this? I understand this is a corporate site and they can do what they wish with it but transparency is a good thing is it not? Why haven't the rest of us been told about the so called private message policy? Or is it in the fine print? It is not standard practice Mark. Think globally but shrink locally? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 Yeah I get it Mark. I was never accusing you of complaining or anything like that. I just thought sources were called for in this case. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 Most of us do find pms to be a benefit. I am aware of Chad and Amy as admins or moderators. Are there more? And shouldn't we know who they are? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eth2 Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 This is a major problem facing many employees in most corporations. The system belongs to the corporation and there is no "reasonable expectation of privacy." Probably, if you were to look at the Klipsch terms of service and privacy statement (there is one isn't there?) this would be spelled out. In any event, THERE IS NO EMAIL SYSTEM THAT IS PRIVATE. THE NSA CAN AND DOES STORE YOUR EMAILS. However, the question is how public is your system? Some accounts are not easily viewed. Encryption is an option, but likely is no challenge for the government to decrypt. Where is Edward Snowden when you need him? Oh ya...Russia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 It's not a legal or philosophical problem. The issue is not privacy here or the expectation thereof. The problem is one of transparency. Who has access? Should we not at least know who may be reading our pm's? After all there is a fairly long history here between most of us. Is klipsch content with "any and all employees may invade your conversation" and if so flat out tell us. If not then tell us which known individuals have that access. It is not helpful to bring up farther reaching surveillance which we all know is going on. It is not the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eth2 Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 (edited) It's not a legal or philosophical problem. The issue is not privacy here or the expectation thereof. The problem is one of transparency. Who has access? Should we not at least know who may be reading our pm's? After all there is a fairly long history here between most of us. Is klipsch content with "any and all employees may invade your conversation" and if so flat out tell us. If not then tell us which known individuals have that access. It is not helpful to bring up farther reaching surveillance which we all know is going on. It is not the point. From "Terms and Conditions: 2. You acknowledge that all intellectual property rights including copyright and database right in the Klipsch web site and its contents belong to or have been licensed to Klipsch or are otherwise used by Klipsch as permitted by applicable law. "...website and its contents belong to or have been licensed to Klipsch..." Sorry Oldtimer, I respectfully disagree and it seems pretty transparent to me. They own it and they can do with it as they wish. Is this close enough (e.g., not "farther reaching surveillance") for you? We may not like it, but it is their sandbox and they set the rules. Our not reading the rules does not constitute a lack of transparency on their part. Edited May 12, 2014 by eth2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 I never claimed not to see the lawyer point of view. The history of the membership here on a moral basis calls for a little more consideration. Not on a legal consideration I agree. I realize it is a weekend or someone may have stepped in by now to clarify just how corporate they want to act towards the loyal customers who have been here for years. The next 24 hours should tell. Lots of things are legal in life yet life is also made up of relationships. How we treat one another can and does matter. I simply would like to know who will be involved in the forum looking at our private messages. The answer in whatever way will reveal a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.