PM count at 100 posts?

[Extreme586]

This is really almost offensive, I've been coming here to get and give help for what seems like forever now. I have about 48 posts and thought it would be nice to pm someone with similar experiences as me. Instead I get your "must have 100 posts" message. I put a lot of thought into my posts, especially when I'm responding to someone because who likes those short quick answers anyway? I like to go as in depth as possible without getting the TL;DR type of response.

Point is lowering the posts for PM's would really be a nice touch. Sure we don't want random people making accounts to spam others, but maybe something more along the lines of a minimum of 25 posts would be a lot nicer to work with for those of us who don't post often and also believe in quality not quantity. Thank You!

[Cognizant]

To be honest, I see no problem with lowering it down to 50.
The reason we have the 100 limit is so that staff can cut down on innapropriate PM's, or PM's that are spam. Usually people looking to engage in these types of PM's give up.
Though I see no problem personally with lowering it down to 50.

[Extreme586]

Ya to be honest, I could have used it quite a while back even before 25. Guess I'm good at 50 now though. :) It's just frustrating that spammers, etc have to ruin useful things that are as simple as private messaging someone. But 100 is just a little too high for that problem, especially for people who could really use it.

[CyanideGoodnight]

Unfortunately, this has been suggested time and time again. It's been shot down almost every single time. While I don't see the issue with lowering it by even just 25 (So post count would have to be 75) I don't see this being implemented any time soon

[ImCoolBeans]

It's set at 100 because it's been proven that a lower number will result in significantly more rule breaking. 50 is far too low and I personally think that 100 is a gift. Members still join and spam their way up to 100 in a matter of an hour or two - so lowering it isn't going to help the site in any way - it will only cause it harm.

[Cognizant]

It's set at 100 because it's been proven that a lower number will result in significantly more rule breaking. 50 is far too low and I personally think that 100 is a gift. Members still join and spam their way up to 100 in a matter of an hour or two - so lowering it isn't going to help the site in any way - it will only cause it harm.

Have you guys actually tried lowering it before? Or are you just assuming that this will happen?

[DerBear]

Have you guys actually tried lowering it before? Or are you just assuming that this will happen?

I believe at one point (way in the past) the PM number limit was 25 posts. The reason why it was raised is because members would easily spam their way up to 25 very very quickly and then start sending PMs. Now it would all be well and fine if users sent PMs that were good and wholesome but with every system comes a crowd with sketchy and dishonorable intentions.

The reason the PM limit is 100 is because it takes time to get to reach 100. yes people spam to 100 easily. However, by that time we usually have dealt with or crushed the malicious intentions. Sure a lot slip by but it would be very very worse if the PM limit was lowered. 50 is way too low and I think 100 is fine.

[Rayquaza]

I think it's fine at 100, especially what everyone said about the people spamming their way up. On a forum website, Private Messaging is a privilege, not a right.

[ImCoolBeans]

Have you guys actually tried lowering it before? Or are you just assuming that this will happen?

It was once a lower number but had to be raised because of how the system was abused. It wasn't 100 from the start; but it was proven that a lower number was far too easy to spam up to, allowing members to abuse the PM system quickly.

[Mirage]

The exact reason for the 100 post limit is due to spammers. People would quickly spam posts in order to send sketchy PMs. The limit is fine the way it is, if you have nothing to hide you can contact that user over VM.

[Cognizant]

Fair enough. You can always VM people, or ask for a special permission to PM, OP!

[StoppingTime]

I agree with Mike, Max, and Derri.
Just the number of threatening moderated VM's that have to be removed should be enough to understand that a lower number of posts for PM usage woud be a very unsafe environment for members.

[Foamy]

If you be patient then you'll get there. If you don't want to wait them use the visitor message system.

[Jupiter]

I actually think it should be lowered at 50. just my two cents... cuz, like. people like hijm have 67 or some posts and have been there for 2 years

[StoppingTime]

It was once a lower number but had to be raised because of how the system was abused. It wasn't 100 from the start; but it was proven that a lower number was far too easy to spam up to, allowing members to abuse the PM system quickly.

I actually think it should be lowered at 50. just my two cents... cuz, like. people like hijm have 67 or some posts and have been there for 2 years

I think established the fact that this will not happen. It just isn't necessary. If a member really wants to genuinely talk to someone off site, they can see if they have any offsite contact details. But the system will almost certainly be abused if it is lowered again.

[horizonlooker]

I think established the fact that this will not happen. It just isn't necessary. If a member really wants to genuinely talk to someone off site, they can see if they have any offsite contact details. But the system will almost certainly be abused if it is lowered again.

I agree. It's not THAT hard to get to 100 posts. Even if you want to be genuinely helpful.

[Lost in the Echo]

It's set at 100 because it's been proven that a lower number will result in significantly more rule breaking. 50 is far too low and I personally think that 100 is a gift. Members still join and spam their way up to 100 in a matter of an hour or two - so lowering it isn't going to help the site in any way - it will only cause it harm.

Exactly what I was thinking. Great point man.

[Jupiter]

I think established the fact that this will not happen. It just isn't necessary. If a member really wants to genuinely talk to someone off site, they can see if they have any offsite contact details. But the system will almost certainly be abused if it is lowered again.

you see personal messaging is not offsite talking, though. it's totally onsite.

[StoppingTime]

you see personal messaging is not offsite talking, though. it's totally onsite.

Right, and that is generally used first.

[Jupiter]

Right, and that is generally used first.

i'm afraid i don't understand what you mean

[StoppingTime]

i'm afraid i don't understand what you mean

Usually, a member will try to PM another before trying to talk offsite because:
A. It's easier
B. Not all members have contact info listed, and if they ask in a VM, it won't go through.

[Jupiter]

but in the same sense what if someone wants to ask a certain friend for help but would rather it be private?

i'm sorry if it seems i'm being rude, i'm really not trying to*

[StoppingTime]

but in the same sense what if someone wants to ask a certain friend for help but would rather it be private?

i'm sorry if it seems i'm being rude, i'm really not trying to*

No, you aren't. You're asking a question. :P
If it is a "certain friend" whom they've become someone close with, then they should know how to contact them, and, if need be, 100 posts is not too hard to achieve.

[Jupiter]

No, you aren't. You're asking a question. :P
If it is a "certain friend" whom they've become someone close with, then they should know how to contact them, and, if need be, 100 posts is not too hard to achieve.

i do suppose you're right, but in this guys case, he actually gave decent advice instead of having like 4 or 5 posts of "yeah i agree" and "yeah normal" and he's just been here for two years. i don't know, just thought i'd try to help him out.

[StoppingTime]

Then you could always send him an email. (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/sendmessage.php?do=mailmember&u=24051) ;)

[Jupiter]

Then you could always send him an email. (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/sendmessage.php?do=mailmember&u=24051) ;)

but they could use their spam email like i do :cool:

anyways, thanks for the answers

[Matt_2012]

Its sometimes a pain but its kinda fun working towards 100.

[bigfoot]

call me crazy but...maybe... just maybe, we could make a user able to PM after he/she has been active for a certain amount of time. like it could be: to PM you must have 100 posts OR be active for *insert amount of months or whatever*

[Jess]

that's a good idea I think, but months is too long....maybe a few days?

[DerBear]

call me crazy but...maybe... just maybe, we could make a user able to PM after he/she has been active for a certain amount of time. like it could be: to PM you must have 100 posts OR be active for *insert amount of months or whatever*

that's a good idea I think, but months is too long....maybe a few days?

Well, lets just think about that. I have seen users who have came on and been members since January this year and they barely have 50 posts and sometimes these people abuse the VM system so y'know who would say they wouldn't then abuse the PM system. The current system is a good system and 100 posts is not hard at all.

If someone is dedicated to the site or is just a casual poster. They can all reach 100 posts easily.

Overall no system is full proof but the current system is good enough and if anything I would like to see the PM limit go up, but the current system is a good system and I think it is more than reasonable.

[StoneColdNicky]

what is VM? I figured all the surveys were just because people were desperately trying to get up to the 100 posts to send a message to someone.

[DerBear]

what is VM?

A VM is short for visitor message.

If you want to send someone a visitor message click on their profile and you should see a box to type into, do that then hit send.

As for the surveys...they can be seen as that but they are also there to help members who need help and are curious and want to compare there own results to another person survey results.

[Scarface]

we tried it at 25 and then we tried it at 75. However people spammed way too quickly to get to that number in a shorter time than it takes to get to 100. The reason it is 100 is that the staff will not only notice the person purposely spamming to get to that post count, but we will be able to get a better impression on whether their intentions are meant for inappropriate activity or if theyre here genuinely for the intended reasons. Unfortunately it has to effect the users who use it with respect, but the cons outweigh the pros. So in order to keep everyone safe and to nip the unfavorable users sooner, we have this system in process.

[TheBigUnit]

I agree with the 100 to pm, I was thinking about maybe a persons REP should be a certain level to PM, but then again if a person is tht desperate he can just make multiple accounts and REP themselves, and the time period active won't be that useful either, I can make an account today forget about for a month and come back, if u want to see how truely active a person is, check how posts they have,

100 posts, leave it, case closed, pls lock this topic, I'm tired of seeing all the posts talking about spamming.

[StoppingTime]

I agree with the 100 to pm, I was thinking about maybe a persons REP should be a certain level to PM, but then again if a person is tht desperate he can just make multiple accounts and REP themselves, and the time period active won't be that useful either, I can make an account today forget about for a month and come back, if u want to see how truely active a person is, check how posts they have,

100 posts, leave it, case closed, pls lock this topic, I'm tired of seeing all the posts talking about spamming.

Reputation is meaningless; it's usually just used as a popularity bar on the site, and it won't be integrated into any privileges.

Also, you have no authority to say "pls lock this topic" seeing as you did not start it. It's a suggestion thread, people are allowed to make suggestions.

[TheBigUnit]

People are ending up just saying the same thing, all mods rules out the idea, I believe this case is closed, tht is tho just a suggestion from me

[TheMatrix]

call me crazy but...maybe... just maybe, we could make a user able to PM after he/she has been active for a certain amount of time. like it could be: to PM you must have 100 posts OR be active for *insert amount of months or whatever*

The problem is, some people make an account, and barely or never post. Instead, they send out strange visitor messages that don't break any rules but seem suspicious. It happens, and it usually takes a long time to catch them for anything. During that time, if they are given the ability to send private messages, it may be too late to do anything once we do catch them.

[Jupiter]

guys, is it possible to make certain users available to get rights to pm? like let's say i joined a year ago and only made quality posts (good joke right?) but would you be able to let me pm people if i was being good?

[StoppingTime]

guys, is it possible to make certain users available to get rights to pm? like let's say i joined a year ago and only made quality posts (good joke right?) but would you be able to let me pm people if i was being good?

Then everyone would ask for that priveledge, and it would mean the mods and admins would have to look through their posts and whatnot. And if we said no, they'd disagree, and I think you know what goes from there. ;)
I really don't like the idea of a "priveledged" member in any form. It causes fights, bashing, and just an unnecessary "look what I can do and you can't" idea.

[DerBear]

guys, is it possible to make certain users available to get rights to pm? like let's say i joined a year ago and only made quality posts (good joke right?) but would you be able to let me pm people if i was being good?

To add onto what Steven said; basically if member knew that could have this perk then they might post "normal" and the post may be of a "qualitative" nature but the fact is, do we know they are going to get the PM ability then ask 20 odd users to Cam.

With every system comes those who wish to abuse it. The current method of how things are run is fine. The system might have the odd flaw but is better than any other option and in my personal opinion if it was to be changed I would want the limit to go up but lets not get into that. Bottom line the system works and that is the good thing.

[ImCoolBeans]

Then everyone would ask for that priveledge, and it would mean the mods and admins would have to look through their posts and whatnot. And if we said no, they'd disagree, and I think you know what goes from there. ;)
I really don't like the idea of a "priveledged" member in any form. It causes fights, bashing, and just an unnecessary "look what I can do and you can't" idea.

This.

A line has to be drawn somewhere - it was drawn at 100. I think that's a pretty fair number.

[bigfoot]

erhm it doesn't bother me that much. It gave me something extra to work toward :)

[Allain1996]

It's set at 100 because it's been proven that a lower number will result in significantly more rule breaking. 50 is far too low.

Then why is it set at 50 posts on your related website, GovTeen?

[DerBear]

Then why is it set at 50 posts on your related website, GovTeen?

Because from my experience gov teen don't really care about their members after all they do have ads that link to Russian dating websites and web cam porn .

Plus we are only apart of there network we aren't like them/copy them.

[Main_]

It isn't that much. But I have an idea: I have a website and I sat values to every boards. So, for example, here, if a member write in the forum-games topic, it doesn't increase his/her posts for that. But there are more important topics. If somebody write in a board in The Psychiatric Ward, he/she could get more something. That something would be another number, not attached to the posts and is invisible for other forumers. And when it reaches 100, they could send private messages. I think it's fair and give a good figure to admins about poeple here in vt. You could even make a visible value about "point"/posts %, shown in the profile.

[DerBear]

It isn't that much. But I have an idea: I have a website and I sat values to every boards. So, for example, here, if a member write in the forum-games topic, it doesn't increase his/her posts for that. But there are more important topics. If somebody write in a board in The Psychiatric Ward, he/she could get more something. That something would be another number, not attached to the posts and is invisible for other forumers. And when it reaches 100, they could send private messages. I think it's fair and give a good figure to admins about poeple here in vt. You could even make a visible value about "point"/posts %, shown in the profile.

To be honest that just sounds even more confusing. Its a simple 100 posts it really isn't a big deal.

[Duke Blue Devils]

Shouldn't anyone be able to have private conversations instead of posting on someone's profile page? :confused:

[Jess]

Shouldn't anyone be able to have private conversations instead of posting on someone's profile page? :confused:

Yes but you can do that after reaching 100 posts. No need for it before having that many posts, for obvious reasons posted above

[Professional Russian]

Then why is it set at 50 posts on your related website, GovTeen?

We are not govteen. We care care about our members. Govteen doesn't. I'm surprised they Haven't been shut down yet

[TigerBoy]

Yeah I like it at 100 - there are still people who join and post loads of really short meaningless posts just to get to 100, and a day or two later get themselves banned because they aren't here for the right reasons. If it didn't penalise decent new users I'd even say put it higher. I don't want to be PM-spammed by people just after videochat, pics, hookups or to sell me crap.

[NSoKShannon]

I would totally love 50+!

[ImCoolBeans]

I would totally love 50+!

Did you take the time to read the thread? If you did you would have (hopefully) seen many reasons why it is not 50. I don't really see why this is an issue, I think 100 is already a gift.

[NSoKShannon]

Did you take the time to read the thread? If you did you would have (hopefully) seen many reasons why it is not 50. I don't really see why this is an issue, I think 100 is already a gift.

Yes, I always read before I post. I guess I can kinda see your reasoning. I can't argue... you are the admin. Sorry bro

[TigerBoy]

Yes, I always read before I post. I guess I can kinda see your reasoning. I can't argue... you are the admin. Sorry bro

You could argue, but you haven't. You've stated your opinion without reasons, and given no reasons for disagreeing with those who have done so.

This is a suggestion forum after all - if you have a great reason that is in the interest of the community, I'd genuinely welcome hearing it.

[Infidelitas]

Just think of having Private Messaging at all a privilege. It could easily be disabled. It really isn't hard to make 100 posts. If you need private messaging when you first join, you probably aren't here for the right reasons.

[kathyswimming]

100 is to many I agree oh well ill just get to 100 fast then

[The joker.]

Im here since yesterday, been really active and i already have 50 posts so i dont think that its a problem, an alternative could be: you have to be online 5 hours before being able to message, it wasnt a problem for me because i just made contact with evryone over skype...

[Coolboi]

I thought if you were a member for like 6 month you could pm ? And that could make up for a 100 post count proves your a good member ? O 1 more thing getting to 100 is not many post.
I think if you been here a long time you should be able to pm with like 50 . 50 an 6 month is fare

[DerBear]

I thought if you were a member for like 6 month you could pm ? And that could make up for a 100 post count proves your a good member ? O 1 more thing getting to 100 is not many post.
I think if you been here a long time you should be able to pm with like 50 . 50 an 6 month is fare

Nope its 100 posts to PM and that is just that. Maybe you were thinking of visitor messages. They require 250 posts and 3 months of membership.

[Coolboi]

ok sorry . An I don't no the 3 month 250 post does that let u pm ?? Or what does that give you

[Erasmus]

ok sorry . An I don't no the 3 month 250 post does that let u pm ?? Or what does that give you

After you have been a member for 3 months, and have 250 posts, your visitor messages stop being moderated.

[Coolboi]

gottcha thanks

[Carlyle]

Been said already, but I see no point in lowering the req. posts for one to PM other users. As mentioned by countless members and staff, it would cause more problems than it does, and 100 posts really isn't that much for the more senior members that actually use it more.

While I'm not trying to put people with less posts down, if you don't have that many posts or you've been here for a long time (i.e 1 year+), chances are you aren't all that active and would have very little reason to pm other users. Besides, you can always leave a VM on their profile. Just my two cents.

[Jakeisamazing]

I agree with the OP.