1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Important Changes at Empty Closets - Discussion Thread

Discussion in 'Empty Closets Help and Feedback' started by Paul_UK, Jun 17, 2008.

  1. Paul_UK

    Paul_UK Guest

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2004
    Messages:
    6,885
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    The separate entries in your profiles for these items will be removed, with the information in them.

    What I am asking is for people to remove them from other places in your profiles, such as signatures, blog entries, profile descriptions etc.

    Sorry if that wasn't clear.
     
  2. AzThRg0

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2007
    Messages:
    588
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    London
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Other
    Out Status:
    Not out at all
    No problem. I know this is new and you guys may not like it but EC's future depends on these changes. Feel free to ask any questions about the changes. Were hear to help and make sure this goes smoothly and again thanks for taking this so well (*hug*)
     
  3. Alexander

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2007
    Messages:
    176
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Red Hook NY
    Would you consider allowing the contact information section to be accessible to friends only? I don't mind having my screennames up in the first place, and I like that people can find them in one place.

    I really like the idea of a forum for established members only. While general debates and stuff is fine for everyone to see, I sometimes feel weird posting more personal stuff in the forums since really anyone can come and read it.
     
    #23 Alexander, Jun 17, 2008
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2008
  4. Paul_UK

    Paul_UK Guest

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2004
    Messages:
    6,885
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    That was one of the options suggested in our discussions but it was not considered acceptable. We had to make that information "on request only".
     
  5. Willywilly92

    Willywilly92 Guest

    i think this completly sucks!! i am aware of the reaso for these changes but still it sucks. new people wont be able to meet the people they and will be restricted to only the new people, like me.

    Also some people, like me, dont make alot of posts but instead like to talk to people on-on-one so it will be a lot harder for these people to become "established members" so they will never truly be members of the site.

    I just think there should be another way to make the site safer other than taking the privliges of the newbies away, and its also not very appealing to people
     
  6. interstella

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2008
    Messages:
    431
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    London, UK
    I agree with Wilywilly92, and as far as I understand (I might be wrong) it was just ONE member who started all this. Can't you just ban him, block him from re-registering and get on with it? Sorry, don't mean to be rude but I'm quite pissed off (goddamn Spanish homework...)
     
  7. Martin

    Board Member Admin Team Full Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Messages:
    15,266
    Likes Received:
    63
    Location:
    Merseyside, UK
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    It was one member, but that does nothing to stop other predators appearing on here. I think we would all love to keep the forum as it is, but sadly that wasn't a choice given to us. It was either remove communication off the public forum entirely or only allow it to approved members. Naturally we took the latter option to at least try and keep things as close to they are now as possible.

    It is very extreme, even the site owners acknowledge that. However it is something that has to be done if EC is to continue. You don't have to like it, but it's something we all have to tolerate. The other EC staff aren't excited about the prospect of going through all the members with 100+ posts and changing their ranks, monitoring their safety and activity, approving new people and keeping the forum running as it is now. We could quite easily moan about it just as much as everybody else, but we want EC to carry on going and this is the only way.

    I know lots of you are not happy with it, and i know that it makes the forum feel like an online version of Big Brother but it really was this solution or no communication at all. This was the best possible alternative for the forum, and (I hate to be blunt) it is useless suggesting things to us. We have looked to try and find better ways to ensure safety but this is what we had to settle with. I'm afraid moaning about it will not change anything. That isn't my way of trying to say "If you don't have a positive opinion then shut up", but just remember that the people you're moaning to about it have tried to find alternative ways and have gone to extreme efforts to make this as painless for you all as possible. I'm sorry that you all don't like it, but i also appreciate that the majority of you see why we have settled for this option and that you're going to stick it out.
     
  8. joeyconnick

    joeyconnick Guest

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto, ON
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    So I'm confused: Behling implied there had been several incidents but Martin above implies it was just one that tipped the scales, as it were.

    Whatever the case, it is sucky but if you look at it one way, it's pretty stunning that there haven't been any major incidents (I'm assuming if there were other incidents they obviously weren't as serious as this) like this beforehand. What that says to me is the whole "online predation" thing, while undeniably real, is probably a lot more rare than the media would have us believe.

    With respect to "private" messaging... they should never have been called "Private Messages" to begin with because the fact of the matter is that from Day One, Paul and any of the other admins (not mods unless they'd been granted extra privileges but admins) have been able to look at them whenever they wanted to. That's how hierarchical computer systems work: the administrator has free reign, essentially. I'm kinda surprised, actually, that there was no system for logging all PMs prior to this; I assumed they were all logged but apparently they only persisted for as long as people kept their copies.

    Here's what I think is a good suggestion: change the name of "private messages" to "direct messages" or "one-to-one messages" or "mail member" or something that does not imply "privacy." I'm not saying anyone had the time or inclination to go snooping around in people PMs before this but that ability has always been there and it would be best to avoid potentially misleading people about their nature.
     
  9. joeyconnick

    joeyconnick Guest

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto, ON
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    If new members will be allowed to PM admins, mods, and experts, would it be possible to allow Established Members to PM new members? If you think about it, it makes a certain amount of sense... presumably "Established" members are trusted and have essentially been vetted, so there shouldn't really be an issue and it would address the situation JSG has raised above. And one assumes it would be possible, if you can limit new member PMs to admins, mods, and experts already.
     
  10. Martin

    Board Member Admin Team Full Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Messages:
    15,266
    Likes Received:
    63
    Location:
    Merseyside, UK
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    There have been several incidents in the past. Behling has referred to them, however I am only referring about the latest one as that is the most drastic and caused this revamp of how the forum works. The other past incidents played no part in these decisions, as far as i know of.

    I think there was a suggestion about changing them to something like 'Personal Messages'. I'm sure i read that somewhere, but don't quote me on it. I definetly remember the idea of changing it's name, and for some reason that name pops up. :eusa_doh:

    Edit: I haven't ignored your above post either. I just think it would be better for an admin to address as they're the ones arranging the PM settings.
     
    #30 Martin, Jun 17, 2008
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2008
  11. joeyconnick

    joeyconnick Guest

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto, ON
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Well I guess that would be convenient in that it would be the same initials: PM. :slight_smile: It would be good to have a disclaimer when people sign up or when they first use them or in that section that mentions that they may be monitored simply for safety purposes. People might not like that but at least then no one could claim you hadn't let them know. They could only claim ignorance and that's never a good defence.

    No worries.
     
  12. otc877

    otc877 Guest

    I had noticed a bit of this going on around here...namely in the post your picture thread and I'm glad the admins are making these changes. I used to have a few pictures in my profile, but ever since I started to notice stuff like this going on I opted to delete all of my pictures... not saying that I was ever a target, just preventative.

    At the same time, I agree with what Janvier was saying. I also like to PM new members, especially ones that are really struggling with their sexuality and just need somebody who understands to talk to. I worry that those members may not get the full "EC Experience" (minus the predators :slight_smile:) that some of the older members received.

    But, in the end, I support this decision and I hope you guys don't catch too much flak for implementing these changes.

    ...now to get those 500 posts...
     
  13. Paul_UK

    Paul_UK Guest

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2004
    Messages:
    6,885
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    If we do that then we would also have to allow new members to PM established members (otherwise they cannot have a useful discussion). Doing this would defeat the whole point of preventing new members (that we know nothing about) PMing members to ask for off-site contact details or whatever.

    I agree with your comment about the name "Private Messages". The idea of calling them "Personal Messages" (so we keep the PM abbreviation) has been suggested and this is something we should look at in due course to avoid confusion there. Maybe just calling them "Messages"?

    Previous incidents were of a more minor nature so were dealt with by banning the members concerned. The nature of this incident meant we needed to bring it to the attention of the site owners who in turn needed to discuss it with their lawyers. This highlighted the problems with the excessively open way things have been done here and areas that needed addressing.

    Another thing I should add here is that I also spoke to an expert in internet law and privacy etc here in the UK about this situation, and the information and advice from him was generally in line with the information and advice from the site owners' lawyers. This confirmed to me that the approach we are now having to take, although not what we would have liked, is reasonable.
     
  14. Paul_UK

    Paul_UK Guest

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2004
    Messages:
    6,885
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    We are disappointed that these concerns are not bought to our attention more often, so we can note them and if necessary deal with them. Even if people don't think it is that serious, please let us know as if we get several such comments there may be more to it.

    This is a general comment by the way, not aimed at you. :thumbsup:

    There is nothing magic about the 500 post count. We are just dividing the membership into groups by post count to make the sorting process easier and more manageable. The 500+ group was the first one to do (and is nearly finished) because it was the easiest due to those members being generally well known to us. The 100-499 post group is next and has been started.
     
  15. joeyconnick

    joeyconnick Guest

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto, ON
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Oh ok... that's tricksy.

    Could the argument be made that by dint of being Established Members, however young, those members are "sensible" enough (or wouldn't have been made EMs) to ignore and report such requests?

    Or (and I realise this isn't fair but it would still help with respect to making new members feel welcome) would it be possible to enable PMs to and from new members for Established Members who are above the age of legal majority? Not that an 18/19/20yo or really someone of any age wants to be approached by someone shady but generally in terms of concern of the law, once you're above a certain age you're considered "on your own" and so I can't imagine EC would get in trouble if an "adult" was approached by someone unsavory.

    For example, JSG (or me, ha) is "of age" and an Established Member, so if he (or I) PM a new member, there would be no concern.

    And I realise this stratifies things by age, which I am usually pretty set against, but it seems to me it would be better to have some ability to communicate with new members for a group a little bigger than just... 12, is it (mods and admins)?

    Also... several mods are underage and yet they will be able to be contacted via PM by new members, so although definitely on a smaller scale, the "issue" will already exist.
     
  16. Blaz

    Blaz Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    Messages:
    153
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    California
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm okay with these changes, I just wish it accounted for members who are busy. I've been here for a while, but I only have like 60 posts.
     
  17. otc877

    otc877 Guest

    The reason I didn't report is because it was nothing concrete or blatant. Mostly just "innocent" compliments made by some older members directed to younger members that made me cringe a bit. :slight_smile:

    But, I'll be sure to let you guys know whenever I cringe :wink:
     
  18. Lava421

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2005
    Messages:
    177
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Unless I misunderstand you, this is a contradiction?

    If your "aim of these changes is to reduce [the] risk" of "... communication ... between people under the age of 18," then:

    everybody who is 18+ should be waived from being classified as regular members or established members. Unless, of course, you could be held liable if people lie about their ages. But if people do lie about this, wouldn't the liability be out of your hands?
     
  19. joeyconnick

    joeyconnick Guest

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto, ON
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    It's a very complicated situation because what makes some people cringe is totally fine to others. Indeed, I've seen things here that are incredibly cringe-worthy to me that no one has apparently batted an eye at, and from people I think should know better. But as you point out, most of the time I just presume it's innocent unless I've really seen a pattern that leads me to believe otherwise.

    Of course, just recently I made some comment about wanting to see a JSG workout video which was definitely meant at least somewhat salaciously. Of course I know JSG personally (as in we've actually met in person) plus we've "known" each other on here quite a while, plus he's an adult in the eyes of the law. Still, I'm sure for some people, if they just look at our respective ages, that is potentially cringe-worthy.

    And then there's the fact that ages of consent differ considerably across the globe, and that saying something sexually-charged to someone isn't the same thing as actually propositioning them.

    I do find myself self-censoring a lot when discussions trend in that direction, usually, but then I'm often hyper-aware of how negatively things can be viewed when there's an age gap between two people. Other people can be kinda oblivious to it, and because they know their motives are not evil, can get very defensive about things when called on it.

    Hopefully some relatively relaxed happy medium can be struck. It's definitely not something you can judge in a black and white manner.
     
  20. Nicvcer

    Nicvcer Guest

    Will "Visitor Messages" be affected?