Suggestions

Jean and I always used to say that Meercat was good with words.
Good to see you, Meercat :-)
I miss Jean :-(

Good to see you are still around Meercat anyway. Yes, most of us who have been around a while know that many people have received nasty PMs, some can ignore them (As I did, although I have only had a couple), the rest find them in varying degrees upsetting. so the suggestion is a good and useful one to members.

hello tw,I do feel better now thankyou. :-D

hello ann,i have just been reading for a while but I didnt want people who do get nasty pms to think they are alone and no one cares just because they havent received them.

Although I haven't been on the receiving end of abusive PM's I do know of people that have. I think TW's Idea is a good one..... as said, other sites have the facility to block people from contacting you so why not GR?

I think more of us are for than against TW so well done for a good suggestion. Meercat, I can't put it any better than that and hello, don't think I have seen youa round lately or have I just missed you?

Hope you feel better now Meercat :-D

You raise another important point Rose, and not just Twitter, but facebook too, OK they are both free, but one of the most often complained about topics is the fact that GR seem to be more willing to communicate with members through facebook than doing it here on their own site. Staff time spent on facebook or twitter is NOT enhancing this site in any way shape or form, though social media is excellent for promotion.

All I'm asking is a one-off small tweak to the system to allow US to manage our own PM area including blocking any unwanted PMs, a standard option on most other sites.

I havent had an abusive message but I have read members pms who have been scared witless by them.
Families have been threatened and the classic i know where you live with the address of the family.
But perhaps thats should not be important to me because I havent received
one and should look more to the profit side of the company.
Why should I bother that other people are being subjected to abuse and threats now matter how small the number.

The answer is because I am human and I feel compassion for the people receiving them.I cant look the other way and ignore because next time it might be me.

well I have got that off my chest. :-D :-D :-D

But you're right about one thing ...there are important things GR should be spending money on.... and having staff spend time twittering isn't one of them. ( unless they're doing it for free?!)

IGP

Approx 40 plus over a 3 year period... ( and I'm not counting the ones which were annoying but not worth the term abusive)

including around 8 ( from one person) which were as a direct result of 'search trees' facility rather than any 'general' presence on the boards.

I think your comment "given that the issue of abusive messages hardly if ever crops up for discussion on these forums." suggests you haven't noticed, rather than that it hasn't cropped up!.... Not on the 'research' boards perhaps, but certainly on the former General and Chat boards.

When considering where to spend money on development, boosting profit is not the only criteria, but an important one nevertheless. You also have consider how many many members are likely to use the facility. I doubt if it would be very many, given that the issue of abusive messages hardly if ever crops up for discussion on these forums.

Out of interest, how many abusive messages have you all had which would warrant blocking the sender, and over what period? My answer to that question is a big fat zero since March 2003.

I just think there are more important things that GR should be spending development resources on.

Most other sites have the option to block people from PMing them if there's a need.

But that fact that it happens at all illustrates there is a need.

You wouldn't phone a company to be told, well there's only 2% of people complained about this particular problem, so we'll do nothing about it, and pretend it's not happening. You'd expect much more than that from customer service. we are paying members, but nobody pays to have abusive private messages sent to them, so I do believe we shoudl have the option of managing this for ourselves. (After all, basic board moderation is entrusted to us and not site staff)

I think it is a good idea.

I don't think every sugegstion made by member's is linked to making money. If it is GR could view it as how many members or potential members could they lose if they don't implement such a solution.

You'd have to ask GR, IGP? and they would have to include the members who have already left the site because of it .... so don't think you're going to get an answer to that one somehow.

So, what percentage of members been on the receiving end of persistent pm-ing from a member who is abusive?

apologies, went to edit and lost the plot :-D

I think it's a good idea, GR need to keep the customers it has, as well as make improvements to attract newcomers. If you haven't been on the receiving end of persistent pm-ing from a member who is abusive you don't realise perhaps how necessary it is to block them straight away rather than have to wait for GR to do it.

IGP, do me the honour of allowing GR to shoot me down in flames if they disagree :-D

Sorry, guys, but you haven't thought this through. Yes, it might be a good idea but it wouldn't get past first base.

Imagine you are sitting on the GR comittee which decides which suggestions are worth developing.

The first question is how much will it cost to develop?

The second question is how many members are likely to use the new facility, perhaps based on the number of blocks made, say, in the past 12 months?

Thirdly, will it generate more income?

The fact that something seems like a good idea doesn't mean that it will be implemented. Far better to champion something that will bring real benefits to the majority of members.

Good idea.

Click and done, instead of having to wait .

i also like that idea :-D

Sounds like a very good idea to me. If it happens to just one person then the problem exists.