Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

SI - Site Forums : Silicon Investor - Welcome New SI Members! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: elpolvo who wrote (29843)	12/20/2013 2:57:22 AM
From: tsigprofit	Respond to of 32968

please, don't post that kind of stuff...they frown on it ;) >> i don't mind you using my pubic posts to further your own desires for content... and i think that's in the TOS that i agreed to, but my PMs are off limits to everyone except the recipient and me.

To: elpolvo who wrote (29843)	12/20/2013 10:31:12 AM
From: Blasher	1 Recommendation Recommended By tsigprofit Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32968

I suggest that you do not participate in social networks if you don't want anything (everything) saved by someone. I think everything done on t he Internet is saved. You could be like my parents who do not have Internet connection because of their fears.

To: elpolvo who wrote (29843)	12/20/2013 1:35:34 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie	11 Recommendations Recommended By Ben Smith Blasher Dale Baker Eric L FJB and 6 more members Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32968

Public Messages - I like the way things are. The proposed changes would open up all kinds of opportunities to revise history. Sure, I'd love the ability to go back and erase all of my bad stock and market calls. I'd love to erase some of the arguments that I got in on political threads. I'd love to erase some of the feuds that I got into with some people. I just don't want you to have the ability to do so, because what you have said in the past helps me (and others) to interpret what you are saying now. It sounds like you would be more comfortable with a scrolling chat room where the messages drop off into oblivion in a minute or two. Even then, you wouldn't have any assurance that somebody wasn't capturing the information along the way. Private Messages - If you use gmail or yahoo for email, do you really have any expectation that deleting an email means that it is deleted from their server? Unless you own the storage device, you should assume that any messages you send, be they private emails, private message, instant message, are going to exist someplace forever. This NSA thing is probably good for us culturally. We'll have to start talking face to face with people again, just to ensure that our communications aren't being recorded.

To: elpolvo who wrote (29843)	12/20/2013 3:03:10 PM
From: SI Dmitry (code monkey)	13 Recommendations Recommended By Blasher Bob clean86 elpolvo FJB and 8 more members Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 32968

Dear elpolvo, Thanks for your feedback. One issue surrounding permanent deletion of private messages is that only one copy of a given message exists on our server even though both the sender sees it in his or her sent items, and the recipient sees it in his or her inbox (or deleted items, as it were). So if we truly deleted that one copy when the recipient deleted it, the sender would no longer have a record of it either. A belief that other online message board services actually delete PMs when you click the "delete" button in many if not most cases is probably inaccurate. That said, we are planning a well needed, major overhaul of SI's messaging system and messaging interface and intend to provide means to make messages more manageable, the interface more intuitive, likely to including the permanent removal from one's deleted items if so desired. Messages would likely not be technically deleted until (at least) both the sender and recipient had deleted them. We do take user privacy and the right to anonymity seriously here, and in general would inform a user of any court order we received to furnish private information or communications before considering acting upon the order. This would additionally allow the user themselves to seek to quash such an order. There are exceptions even in this, however; for example we would not shield sender privacy from legal authorities in the private transmission of child pornography using our systems. That said, we are very proud of SI's long history of supporting the right of users to anonymously deliberate stocks. With respect to public messages, we like this system the way it is. The record is the record. In fact, we plan to add the stock price at time of message post to messages on our boards in stock forums. So, if you recommended shorting Netflix in January of this year, you are probably going to have to learn to live with that post and the price at the time of the post sitting right next to it. We don't want facilitate historical revision to protect the reputation of a user's SI alias. We love the way our system empowers end users to make informed judgments about other participants' credibility - especially in recommending the purchase or sale of assets - based upon their own words in an accurate, lengthy historical context. Regards, @Dima