whowhawhy
Well-Known Member
- Jan 19, 2023
- 1,124
- 2,107
- 373
read the stated reason again then
but also
it was a reply to
ask chatgpt to translate it for you?
Cannot respond to conversation
- Thread starter Ehmgeeaye
- Start date
but also
it was a reply to
whowhawhy
Well-Known Member
- Jan 19, 2023
- 1,124
- 2,107
- 373
if you really can't think of any possible effects/uses of this, here's an example:
tech illiterate lurkers won't as easily fall for "message me for download" malware traps or participate in "don't trade in private messages" rule breaking.
it's not meant to be an impenetrable obstacle (the only sure way to prevent undesired behavior in conversations is the same one bob stated), but one in a series of new-and-existing hurdles (two other that you may have noticed are autocorrect censoring of certain keywords, and a much shorter timeframe for editing-in or editing-out stuff from messages in converstions) that together deter through inconvenience (without hurting legitimate users too much, and without making all offenders that won't be deterred engage in harder to detect evasion tactics because easier-to-trace methods were all blocked for them).
it's also not a huge inconvenience for the userbase (unlike some draconian solutions that were suggested earlier this year), and site staff aren't idiots, so if they're content with it for now, they have reasons for it and that should be enough for us (edit: by which i mean, sure we can try to guess what all possible reasons for the changes were and how that takes care of them, or have site staff explain it to us, but that'd be just for satisfying our curiosity on the inner workings of the site).
tech illiterate lurkers won't as easily fall for "message me for download" malware traps or participate in "don't trade in private messages" rule breaking.
it's not meant to be an impenetrable obstacle (the only sure way to prevent undesired behavior in conversations is the same one bob stated), but one in a series of new-and-existing hurdles (two other that you may have noticed are autocorrect censoring of certain keywords, and a much shorter timeframe for editing-in or editing-out stuff from messages in converstions) that together deter through inconvenience (without hurting legitimate users too much, and without making all offenders that won't be deterred engage in harder to detect evasion tactics because easier-to-trace methods were all blocked for them).
it's also not a huge inconvenience for the userbase (unlike some draconian solutions that were suggested earlier this year), and site staff aren't idiots, so if they're content with it for now, they have reasons for it and that should be enough for us (edit: by which i mean, sure we can try to guess what all possible reasons for the changes were and how that takes care of them, or have site staff explain it to us, but that'd be just for satisfying our curiosity on the inner workings of the site).
Last edited:
- Jan 21, 2022
- 12,204
- 24,013
- 964
I'm trying to figure out what someone who doesn't communicate in threads has anything to communicate about in private messages? About the only thing, with little exception, I've seen is people asking others, unsolicited, for links to content off site....
Of the number of people I have had active private conversations with on this site - nearly all the ones with valuable conversations had hundreds, if not thousands, of posts before they initiated contact. The few that had less than a handful only wanted something from me, instead of actually wanting to engage in a conversation, (link to content off site, personal help on a game issue that I had already addressed in a game thread, etc). I didn't broach starting a conversation with someone until I had several hundred posts.
So if allowing users with lower post numbers to simply engage in private conversations leads to people simply asking for a link to content on another site, or something similar, then increasing that number does create greater pressure on people to either communicate in threads or reconsider their idea of what private conversations should be used for. If limiting those users simply seeking other content then limits those who are seeking content which is against the site rules, then increasing the number of posts appears to be a good thing if it eventually limits the sharing of banned content.
Private conversations on this site should be considered a privilege, not a right, IMO. If private conversations are increasing the risk of this site being pulled into the sharing of banned content and, thus, increasing the possibility of unwanted attention by legal entities and/or hacktivists - for example:
As whowhawhy pointed out in shithole last month, there's been some serious changes in the site's contact and abuse page as well as policies regarding certain content:
Or a fair bit of malware spreading and other malicious activity is occurring with low-posting accounts being either (or both) the offender or the victim .... then, yeah... Because of abuse and that abuse has the potential of putting the site's viability in jeopardy, the "inconvenience" may cause some "bad actors" to just say forget it and move on... It may not. If it does not, expect more restrictions regarding personal conversations to come. This isn't an "etched in stone" policy, it will evolve as necessary for the viability of the site and the number of people who administrate, manage, moderate the site --- all doing so 100% as volunteers.
This isn't something you should feel compelled to respond to, but hopefully something to consider why the number is higher now (and why I personally think it should be MUCH higher).
Naraden
Newbie
- Sep 4, 2023
- 15
- 11
- 121
I can't talk for others, but in my case it was intended to share contact information without making it publicly available, in the context of the game development recruiting forum. If you look at that forum most people there have low post counts, so exchanging info privately is difficult, more so now the receiver also requires a minimum of posts.
Again talking for myself, but if I have something to say specific to a game (question, appreciation, etc.) I rather do it off-site in the official game Discord which most have, as most developers are not active on f95 or don't even engage here.
The irony is that I intend to have private conversations off the site, but that makes it also difficult to do so.
I get the abuse it's a big problem, but it's frustrating that the increasing limitations hamper legitimate usage, and particularly regarding the development of new games, difficult as it already is to find people in this niche, as there isn't many other places where you can discuss this kind of thing.
TomoeTheMimicCosplayer
Newbie
- Nov 29, 2025
- 26
- 13
- 3
that was more of a rhetorical but I get the reasoning behind it, trolls and bot accounts are annoying, also wild banner lol
I sympathize, of course but is it not somewhat overkill to not allow people to reply to DMs? for example I have a gamedev asking for log files and I can't even tell them "sorry no" right now. Would it be possible to moderate this to at least be able to reply people if they have a staff or dev tag?
- Jan 21, 2022
- 12,204
- 24,013
- 964
Just go post 3 more time in game threads of games you like. Done. Go to the introductions sub forum and introduce yourself - reply to 2 people who reply to you. Go say "Welcome" to 3 new people in the introductions sub forum.
It's 10 posts - and you already have 7. It's not like it's running a marathon after gorging on a full all-you-can-eat buffet.
I find it very strange that people who don't talk in the threads are highly motivated to chat in DMs and they find it difficult to fathom how simple it is to post 10 times (meaningfully - not spamming).
I mean - how are you connecting with people BEFORE sliding into DMs if you aren't chatting in threads?
- Jul 5, 2017
- 6,372
- 45,373
- 980