ARF PMs Not Private?

To those who won't know what I am referring to: Earlier today I posted a controversial
video (link) regarding a Marine who some considered a Patriot.
It was deemed Too Political for Alan & ARF, and was summarily DELETED. NOT PC!
A member asked for the link to the "Patriot" Video, and I provided it to him via a PM.
You can imagine my shock, when upon reviewing the PM to him, that the LINK had been BLOCKED , and in it's place : "Political Comments are not permitted."
WOW.

Hmmm. The only legit explanation I can think of is if you copied the vid link from the ARF thread into your PM after Alan blocked it. If anyone is monitoring member's PMs, there will be holy heck to pay.

-Phil

Uffda wrote:Hmmm. The only legit explanation I can think of is if you copied the vid link from the ARF thread into your PM after Alan blocked it. If anyone is monitoring member's PMs, there will be holy heck to pay.

-Phil

No, Phil, I did not. I'll try it again.

By the way, here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bggXQxhyo4s

OK, it is blocked in my PM. I think Alan has some kind of computer magic that if he kills a link it cannot be transmitted through any ARF space. I doubt he can actually look at our PMs, but that still seems kind of rotten to control private content by any means. Of what concern is it to him if it is a personal message?

-Phil

I can test that...The same video is under different names and Links.

********************
Your theory was correct,

Apparently the 1st link to the Patriot VID was killed within ARF's entire system- affecting both The Clubhouse (Which was it's intent), but also in the PM Box(es).

A second link (and different name) to the Same VID , does work.

Uffda wrote:. I doubt he can actually look at our PMs,

-Phil

I can say with 110% certainty that he does ' review' PMs when some sort of controversy arises. That was a very key point in his decision to ban me from ARF and he doesn't deny it.

RadioNut39 wrote:I can test that...The same video is under different names and Links.

********************
Your theory was correct,

Hi, Nutt.

I'm seeing a string of asterisks where I think I should be seeing something else. Has this forum also censored the link?

-Bill
radioexray@gmail.com

From Alans post on ARF

Alan Voorhees
Site Admin


Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 3923
Location: Oakland, CA Posted: 04 Mar 2009 01:05

Private messages are not publicly viewable. Everything posted on this site, public and private (with the exception of your password which is encrypted) is viewable by me. Private messages are not directly viewable, but they are stored as plain text in the database, which I have access to, so they could possibly be seen by me. This is all spelled out in the site Privacy Policy which is linked to at the bottom of the page.

After a link to the video in question was posted a second time, it was added to the word censor list to prevent further attempts to re-post it. That's when I discovered the second post was a different URL and realized it was pointless to try to list every URL that linked to every version of it and gave up.

I'm not sure about ARF, but most other forums I belong to make it clear, at least in the fine print, that PM's can be monitored. An exchange of e-mail addresses to discuss controversial subjects is always a better idea.

John

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKFKGrmsBDk

easyrider8 wrote:From Alans post on ARF

Alan Voorhees
Site Admin


Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 3923
Location: Oakland, CA Posted: 04 Mar 2009 01:05

Private messages are not publicly viewable. Everything posted on this site, public and private (with the exception of your password which is encrypted) is viewable by me. Private messages are not directly viewable, but they are stored as plain text in the database, which I have access to, so they could possibly be seen by me. This is all spelled out in the site Privacy Policy which is linked to at the bottom of the page.

After a link to the video in question was posted a second time, it was added to the word censor list to prevent further attempts to re-post it. That's when I discovered the second post was a different URL and realized it was pointless to try to list every URL that linked to every version of it and gave up.

RED HIGHLIGHT : What the heck does that mean? Is'nt that a contradiction? Or am I missing something?
OK, so Alan has the Right to do so...(similiar to a Landlords right to enter a tenant's apt. - BUT WHY would the Landlord look in a closet? or Read my mail? WHY would Alan EVER think it NECESSARY to go in and specificly view Member's Private Messages to each other?
*************************************

Addendum: In all fairness, I am posting Alan V.'s Response on ARF :

" ... Sigh ...

Just because something is technically possible, doesn't mean it's done. I have better things to do than to sift through database entries and match up record numbers with snippets of text with the goal of trying to piece together what someone wrote to someone else.

"Private" means your message is not posted publicly, not that it's somehow encrypted when it's stored in the database."

Timaaay! wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKFKGrmsBDk

THAT is GREAT!

I'm honestly not sure what is considered political and what is not at ARF. Case in point: There was a thread about the switch to digital TV and a member wrote that "with the Government coupons, it isn't costing us anything."
I replied that "on top of the 3 billion already spent, the stimulus bill has an additional 650 million to cover more coupons." That was deleted as being "political". I wasn't trying to be political, just pointing out that it WAS costing us money. I reworded it to say something like " It's not free, it will cost us money as taxpayer dollars are being spent to fund it." This was also deleted as being "political"
The last thing I wanted to do was be "political" and the fact that it was viewed as being that way is not within the scope of my understanding. I apologized to the moderator and now I don't post anything there except for some advice on how to troubleshoot something.
Either I'm not smart enough to understand the rules or I truly don't see things as being political that are viewed that way by others. In either case, I thought it better to not post there as I don't want to offend others.
I still fail to see what the political undertones of my post was, but perhaps someone could explain it to me if you have any ideas. I'm not being wise-guy here, I'm looking for an honest opinion.

I'm sure the owner or administrators of a forum can look at your PM's if they want to. Moderators can't see that, but I think administrators can. So your so-called private PM's aren't so private after all.

Timaaay! wrote:I'm honestly not sure what is considered political and what is not at ARF. Case in point: There was a thread about the switch to digital TV and a member wrote that "with the Government coupons, it isn't costing us anything."
I replied that "on top of the 3 billion already spent, the stimulus bill has an additional 650 million to cover more coupons." That was deleted as being "political". I wasn't trying to be political, just pointing out that it WAS costing us money. I reworded it to say something like " It's not free, it will cost us money as taxpayer dollars are being spent to fund it." This was also deleted as being "political"
The last thing I wanted to do was be "political" and the fact that it was viewed as being that way is not within the scope of my understanding. I apologized to the moderator and now I don't post anything there except for some advice on how to troubleshoot something.
Either I'm not smart enough to understand the rules or I truly don't see things as being political that are viewed that way by others. In either case, I thought it better to not post there as I don't want to offend others.
I still fail to see what the political undertones of my post was, but perhaps someone could explain it to me if you have any ideas. I'm not being wise-guy here, I'm looking for an honest opinion.

THANK GOD! I thought it was just me... Exactly...The word is ARBITRARY.
As in, "based on or determined by individual preference or convenience rather than by necessity or the intrinsic nature of something"... "existing or coming about seemingly at random or by chance or as a capricious and unreasonable act of will".

I think it's based on whether or not a moderator or Alan likes you or not...? It's bizarre.
In my own case, I don't mind being controversial, I have some non-conforming and
unconventional views on many things-from the existance of ghosts to The New World Order. Oh welllll, that's just me. I think all you have to do is strike one wrong chord about SOME subject that rubs the Administration the wrong way, and you are essentially "flagged". (ala XRAY ). This may not even be a conscious decision! Or maybe it is...?
It is clear to me that not everyone is treated the same. Some are given HUGE "slack"-while others are not.
Some things are judged "political" if written by one person; SAME thing written by another is not political- again, the ARBITRARY decision.

Case in point : SIXMILLION DOLLARMAN posted:"Stolen registered letters with Payment":
And JG Jackson jgj6331 responded: jgj6331 wrote:
SIXMILLION DOLLARMAN wrote:
......Now, since mid January, since Hussein Obsama is elected and
the LAW & ORDER president George W. Bush is gone, I lost
3 letters of about 7 inbetween 20 days.
I lost payments in total from more than 100,- US$..........


I don't believe the results of the US election had any bearing whatsoever on the loss of your money - with the current administration, your money will only be stolen if you are a productive, tax-paying citizen . ***********************************
AND I responded:

Hahaaha

OK, Now Wait a Minute, here! While I fully appreciate the humor - IS'NT THIS POLITICAL ?!

I Guess it really is, as Panther Dan Stated: "On this Forum we live under a benevolent dictatorship."
Things I never thought were political when I Posted, I was later informed, WERE.
This Post is apparently NOT considered Political.
Perhaps if a spoonful of Levity is added...to help the medicine go down?

I am NOW thoroughly Confused!

**********************************
NOTE: Absolutely nothing against Mr. Jackson. It IS humorous.