• Welcome to Simple Machines Community Forum. Please login or sign up.
December 05, 2021, 04:13:27 AM

News:

SMF 2.0.18 has been released! Please update. Read more.


PM Message Rules - Members can avoid Admin PMs & Warning PMs

Started by xrunner, December 11, 2010, 08:39:46 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

xrunner

Note: This topic was posted in the SMF support area, but got no responses, I am hoping for some comment here since I consider this a bug also.

*****

SMF 2.0 RC4

We just discovered that a member can set up a rule in their PM area which can auto-delete all PMs from Admins, Global Mods, or any other membergroup that exists. This seems strange. How can we make it so members cannot set up a rule that deletes Admin, or Global Mod, or System Warning messages from the moderation center?

Surely this is an oversight in SMF 2.0 RC4. No member should be able to set up a rule to auto-delete these staff messages. How can we disable groups from appearing in the member's PM rule configuration area, or keep them from setting up a rule for each Admin or Global Mod to delete their PMs? We would like them to be able to disable PMs from members who are harassing them, but not PMs from Admins!

Let me be very clear here - Setting up a rule to delete messages from Administrators also deletes all the warning messages sent to the user, this was verified by testing. No user should be able to auto-delete warning messages! This must be an oversight or bug.

sawz

Quote from: xrunner on December 11, 2010, 08:39:46 AM

Let me be very clear here - Setting up a rule to delete messages from Administrators also deletes all the warning messages sent to the user, this was verified by testing. No user should be able to auto-delete warning messages! This must be an oversight or bug.

so your saying you send a warning message, its filtered by the user and deleted and your copy is deleted as well?
keep smiling, they'll always wonder what your up too.....

xrunner

Quote from: sawz on December 11, 2010, 09:11:26 AM
so your saying you send a warning message, its filtered by the user and deleted and your copy is deleted as well?

A member can set up a rule to auto-delete all messages from admin, including the anonymous warning messages sent when their warning level is adjusted. There are no copies that I know of for the warning messages; but that is beside the main point.

How is it not a bug to allow members to set up a PM rule that will delete admin and warning messages messages? There is no way I've found to disable this ability for regular members. This is a bug that defeats the warning messages from the warning system, and important messages from Globals and Admins.

sawz

in v bulletin you can choose not to receive messages or notification from the admins.
this isn't any different. if a user chooses to ignore warnings, ban them.
keep smiling, they'll always wonder what your up too.....

xrunner

Quote from: sawz on December 11, 2010, 09:25:13 AM
in v bulletin you can choose not to receive messages or notification from the admins.
this isn't any different. if a user chooses to ignore warnings, ban them.

Thanks for addressing my question, but, very respectfully, what difference does it make whether it's the same as vbulletin or not? Just because it's the same as a competing forum doesn't mean logically it makes sense or is a good idea; and this doesn't make sense nor is it a good idea.

Letting members make PM rules to auto-delete admin and warning messages defeats the purpose of these message. It makes no sense whatsoever to me nor my other moderators. None of us understand why this is allowed with no way to turn it off. Admins must have unfettered ability to communicate with members whether they like it or not. How is this not so?

Can you explain why we can't at least remove certain groups from the rules making options?

Illori

I just did a test, I added my admin account to my test accounts ignore list, pm setting is set to accept from all but those on ignore list. I log into admin account that was put on ignore list and send pm to test account. check test accounts pm list and the message is there anyway.

tested with smf 2.0 RC4

xrunner

Quote from: Illori on December 11, 2010, 03:51:59 PM
I just did a test, I added my admin account to my test accounts ignore list, pm setting is set to accept from all but those on ignore list. I log into admin account that was put on ignore list and send pm to test account. check test accounts pm list and the message is there anyway.

tested with smf 2.0 RC4

I did the same test and it didn't work that way.

Besides -

Quote from: sawz on December 11, 2010, 09:25:13 AM
in v bulletin you can choose not to receive messages or notification from the admins.
this isn't any different. if a user chooses to ignore warnings, ban them.

sawz just said it works like vbulletin, you can choose to not receive admin PMs. So he agrees with me it seems.

Illori

which receive personal messages from option did you test with? by default you cant ignore admin pm's from what i can see.

xrunner


Quote from: Illori on December 11, 2010, 03:51:59 PM
I just did a test, I added my admin account to my test accounts ignore list,...

Oh wait - you are doing it wrong. I'm not talking about the ignore list, I'm talking about setting a Rule in the PM area where you can auto-delete messages from entire groups. It's a capability in your PMs. That's what you don't understand.

Illori

I just noticed that and can confirm what you said, I also dont like that all groups are shown even if they are marked private.

xrunner

Quote from: Illori on December 11, 2010, 04:13:54 PM
I just noticed that and can confirm what you said, I also don't like that all groups are shown even if they are marked private.

Exactly! Thank you. I also see a huge flaw in the design of this "rule" option, as I've said no member should be able to set up a rule to auto-delete Admin's PMs. That's why the ignore list let's Admin's PMs through even though they are chosen to be ignored. Admins can't be ignored!

ThorstenE

the rules are completely independent from the group status.. take a look at the popular email clients  (thunderbird, outlook, popular webmail clients...). you can add a simple rule which deletes all mails from "postmaster".

Even if you would force me to GET these PMs, you can't force me to READ & UNDERSTAND these PMs..
Even if I can't delete these PMs via a rule directly I could still mark them with a label "don't read" or something similar and simply ignore them.

IMHO this is intended and is fine as it is.

xrunner

Quote from: TE on December 12, 2010, 02:34:33 AM
the rules are completely independent from the group status.. take a look at the popular email clients  (thunderbird, outlook, popular webmail clients...). you can add a simple rule which deletes all mails from "postmaster".

Here we go again...SMF doesn't have to behave like email clients. I just don't understand why these comparison to other software are being made. Why does SMF have to act like vbulletin or anything else? It needs to act the best way for the administrators of SMF forums.

Quote
Even if you would force me to GET these PMs, you can't force me to READ & UNDERSTAND these PMs..
Even if I can't delete these PMs via a rule directly I could still mark them with a label "don't read" or something similar and simply ignore them.

And that's my point - no Administrator PM should be stopped from getting to the inbox. After that we don't have control, but that's no excuse from allowing them to be stopped. You take it as far as it can go under some administrative control.

Please tell me - why would it be logical to be able to stop warning messages from appearing in a member's inbox? Just approach it logically.

Quote
IMHO this is intended and is fine as it is.

I have a completely different opinion, and so do my moderators.

Norv

Quote from: Illori on December 11, 2010, 04:13:54 PM
I also dont like that all groups are shown even if they are marked private.

I don't seem to replicate this - actually if the groups are marked as 'invisible' (or even 'visible - except in group key'), they are not shown in the list of the user to choose. Privately assigning groups does not imply the groups should be invisible, setting them as invisible does make them unavailable however.
To-do lists are for deferral. The more things you write down the later they're done... until you have 100s of lists of things you don't do.

File a security report | Developers' Blog | Bug Tracker


Also known as Norv on D* | Norv N. on G+ | Norv on Github

Illori

I had not seen the option to make a group visible/invisible that fixed the issue.

ThorstenE

xrunner,
I quote myself:
QuoteEven if you would force me to GET these PMs, you can't force me to READ & UNDERSTAND these PMs..
It doesn't matter if a PM is in my inbox or elsewhere.. I can still ignore the PM completely and simply click the "delete" button.

I personally miss these two PM options:
+ Receive personal messages from buddies only (buddies but not admins)
+ Receive personal messages from none.


xrunner

Quote from: Illori on December 12, 2010, 11:30:49 AM
I had not seen the option to make a group visible/invisible that fixed the issue.

OK, maybe that's the way to go, What are all the ramifications of make a group invisible?

Illori

that does not fix the issue that this thread was about to start, it fixes the issue i found about listing all groups in the ignore group list.

xrunner

Quote
It doesn't matter if a PM is in my inbox or elsewhere.. I can still ignore the PM completely and simply click the "delete" button.

Yes, but my point is this: You go as far as you can go. Up to a point, of course you can't prevent a person from reading or even understanding a PM.

Yet, this is no excuse (IMHO) to allow any regular member to make a rule to auto-delete PM from Admin or the warning system. Take an analogy - a summons. Does the legal system say to itself -

"Well, we can deliver the summons but that doesn't mean the recipient won't throw it in the trash or even understand it. I guess delivering summons doesn't make sense considering those things cold happen"

No. The summons is always delivered. The information is taken as far as it can go up to the point where the person receiving it is bound to take responsibility.

Same thing with PMs from Admins and warnings. Like a summons, you make them get delivered as far as you can. That's my beef here.

emanuele

What do we want to do here?

I'm slightly in favour of always deliver warnings, but not admins PMs.


Take a peek at what I'm doing! ;D




Hai bisogno di supporto in Italiano?

Aiutateci ad aiutarvi: spiegate bene il vostro problema: no, "non funziona" non è una spiegazione!!
1) Cosa fai,
2) cosa ti aspetti,
3) cosa ottieni.

Advertisement: