Buddy list & Private Messages

[zell12]

According to this, adding users to your buddy list allows you to send PMs to multiple users on your buddy list. Now what I want to understand is how this buddy list makes it any easier. It only adds a + sign to user names down the bottom in the "Who's Online" tab, and puts them in a big list.

So is that it? Anyone know? Is this some sort of feature Administrators have disabled? Or is the FAQ not up-to-date with this version of vB?



Also, why not add the Member List back?!?

There is only 5,272 members. I'm sure there is quite a few accounts which could be removed (Old Playerworld Staff accounts, etc), if you think that is the problem?? There should be no reason it's disabled... x-x

[zell]

Yeah dude, what's up with that?

[Taikun]

Enable!

[Tyhm]

Thread exists in Future Improvements methinks. Yeah, enable. What spam fear we?

[Darlene159]

Originally Posted by zell12

Also, why not add the Member List back?!?

Unixmad has already said No to this.

[Devil]

You're not getting the memberlist back, so this is useless guys.

[Unpredlctable]

Originally Posted by Darlene159

Unixmad has already said No to this.

I'm not going to argue with this, because it really doesn't concern me very much, but why does he not want us to be able to use the member's list? Has he ever given any reason?

[Devil]

I think the reason was account privacy, as in there would be alot of old accounts around here, and their email addies would be in them, re-create old email and you have that account.

Or, he owns Graal, he can do what he wants.

[Chandler]

Little hint:
http://forums.graal2001.com/forums/member.php?u=1
Edit the last vector, this case being 1.
http://forums.graal2001.com/forums/member.php?u=4

[zell12]

Email address can be hidden. Sending PMs to multiple people can be turned off. (Not sure why you would want to turn it off, spammers cannot sign-up to this forum without paying, and there is a limit of 5 people anyway)

It puts little strain on the servers hosting the forums. If I have to go find that old thread where it was last discussed a few years ago I will, but it was pretty much proven it has little effect.


Darlene, why are you a forum administrator? Same power as a Super-Moderator. No say in anything. Why? You do not share your opinions, even neutral ones, with this community. You don't take part in discussions, nor does half the moderating team. You guys are sad.

[Tyhm]

I wonder - if Moonie came out and said "Yeah, well I happen to agree with Unixmad, and if it WERE my decision I'd STILL disable it just because none of you would shut up about it!", would we riot more or less?

[Sam]

Originally Posted by zell12

Darlene, why are you a forum administrator? Same power as a Super-Moderator. No say in anything. Why? You do not share your opinions, even neutral ones, with this community. You don't take part in discussions, nor does half the moderating team. You guys are sad.

Sorry but you're wrong there are different powers of Admin and Super Mod, also is Moonie talking with Unixmad very often.

In general I do not understand why some people have problems to accept decisions made by the owner of this forum:

• If Unixmad or Stefan thinks Moonie or her team is doing something wrong they will tell them or ban them.

• If they want to enable any feature the community requested, they will do it, if not they don't.

Very simple, isn't it?

[Tyhm]

It could be a simple question of perceptions:
We see us ask Moonie and we see Moonie say No, Unixmad doesn't want it.
And we see you say if Unixmad wanted it, he'd be doing it already.
And we see that it's nigh impossible for any of us to get a hold of Unixmad, we see that former general managers agree he's a tough guy to get in touch with, and we percieve that none of you have it any better.
Thus we conclude, Moonie never actually talks to Unixmad, just keeps on doing what she percieves to be His will in His absence, and if we have a problem with it she just points to the empty chair and says He wants it this way.

Which is why we'd like it to be a question of Moonie says it shall be this way, then we can at least get mad at Moonie for having rules we disagree with instead of it being all ethereal.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Tyhm

It could be a simple question of perceptions:
We see us ask Moonie and we see Moonie say No, Unixmad doesn't want it.
And we see you say if Unixmad wanted it, he'd be doing it already.
And we see that it's nigh impossible for any of us to get a hold of Unixmad, we see that former general managers agree he's a tough guy to get in touch with, and we percieve that none of you have it any better.
Thus we conclude, Moonie never actually talks to Unixmad, just keeps on doing what she percieves to be His will in His absence, and if we have a problem with it she just points to the empty chair and says He wants it this way.

Which is why we'd like it to be a question of Moonie says it shall be this way, then we can at least get mad at Moonie for having rules we disagree with instead of it being all ethereal.

I know Unixmad personal and so I know his opinion. I also know that he is talking to Moonie over ICQ and PM, last not least I see what he is posting in the Moderator's sandbox.

[zell12]

Originally Posted by Sam

I know Unixmad personal and so I know his opinion. I also know that he is talking to Moonie over ICQ and PM, last not least I see what he is posting in the Moderator's sandbox.

Ok big shot, since you know his opinion, enlighten us. Why is the members list disabled?

[Sam]

Originally Posted by zell12

Ok big shot, since you know his opinion, enlighten us. Why is the members list disabled?

I didn't ask him, because I don't want it enabled.

[zell12]

Thought you knew?? ? ? ?? ? ? ?