Sara - can you please tell me why private messaging isnt enabled anymore?
Thanks
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
quote:Ding ding ding, we have a winner! No reason would have been good enough. I could say leaving it enabled would result in the end of humanity and people woulda still wanted it left on. The feature was used 9 times in the past 3 months. Taht's 3 times a month. It wont be missed by many.
I suspect she wants to avoid the argument that follows any explaination.
quote:
The feature was used 9 times in the past 3 months. Taht's 3 times a month. It wont be missed by many
quote:Truly one of the oddest replies from a support person to a legitimate & reasonable question I have ever seen.
Why ask why?....
quote:To learn something.
Why ask why?
quote:No, but who cares?
Did Adam and Eve have navels?
quote:They sometimes are! You just don't know they are a WRONG number until they are NOT busy!
How come wrong numbers are never busy?
quote:No longer than what will fit on 5 full-sized newspaper pages.
How long is a short story?
quote:Are you being sarcastic or were you genuinely satisfied with that response?
Originally posted by jakedduck:
Thank you for the explanation Sara, I appreciate it.
quote:That changes nothing, the point was never about the number. And now you see why I didnt answer to begin with.
Don't bother coming back with where you got those figures from, I KNOW they are incorrect
quote:The private topics report shows you created 0 topics in the past 3 months. Did you create any or only join ones invited by others?
I'm with Lexie on this one. 9 uses in 3 months??? While I've cut back on my private messaging, I think I've done more than that just myself!
quote:Nope. Maybe it did, but it if so it would be maybe 25 cents a month or something for the extra bandwidth.
Maybe having the private messaging feature as part of the forum costs AS more money?
quote:
Originally posted by Sniper Sara B.:
Don't know, don't care, doesn't matter. I was merely trying to point out it wasnt a widely used feature and now I basically get called a liar on this and all the other "grossly exaggerated" statistics.
quote:The reason wasnt the low use. Not many people use the polls but we didnt turn those off. Heck private topics were probably used more than the poll feature. Fact is there wasnt a reason that we cared to explain and it was best to just let it be. Which I tried hard to do. Perhaps my delivery wasn't the greatest but I'd rather not answer then give some stupid reason that would basically be a lie then let everyone argue while I sit back.
The best response would have been
quote:I've only ever created a couple private topics, all now inactive. One (Linda & the Lamp) had HUNDREDS of posts before it finally fizzled. I participated in 2 other private topics fairly regularly. I didn't realize your measure of the utilization of the feature is the number of private topics CREATED rather than the number of POSTS MADE to existing private topics.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm with Lexie on this one. 9 uses in 3 months??? While I've cut back on my private messaging, I think I've done more than that just myself!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The private topics report shows you created 0 topics in the past 3 months. Did you create any or only join ones invited by others?
quote:Yes, I think that's how it worked. The originator has (had) to delete topics.
Perhaps if you create them, then later close them the system deletes them.
quote:Yep.
Don't know, don't care, doesn't matter.
quote:Nope -- your words, no one else's -- but if the shoe fits! If your usuage figures refer to only topics CREATED, I think I could buy that, but if your figures are supposed to represent number of posts made to private topics (a better utilization measurement of the feature, IMO) -- NO WAY!
I was merely trying to point out it wasnt a widely used feature and now I basically get called a liar