Advanced search

PLEASE can we have the option to block all PMs?

(130 Posts)
SoupDragon Wed 06-Jun-12 12:07:09

I don't want to receive them.


You used to be able to opt out of receiving CATS messages and I would like the same option now. It won't affect anyone who doesn't want to opt out.

usualsuspect Wed 06-Jun-12 12:10:11

It's annoying when someone sends you a snotty PM I agree

fedupofnamechanging Wed 06-Jun-12 20:46:16

Don't you think it's nice though, when somebody sends you something supportive and unexpected? You might miss it, if you opt out.

SoupDragon Wed 06-Jun-12 20:47:43

Don't you think that's my decision though?

Like I said, you used to be able to opt out of receiving CAT messages. Now you can't.

klaxon Wed 06-Jun-12 21:06:46

Shall I send you a PM to tell you how to do it? grin

klaxon Wed 06-Jun-12 21:07:19

Also easiest way to achieve this is to send one to yourself and then block it on your email recipients list.

OhNoMyFanjo Wed 06-Jun-12 21:09:33

Erm just don't read them....

GitAwfMayLend Wed 06-Jun-12 21:12:14

Oh no I hope you haven't received any shitty PMs soupy.

I don't mind being called a twat etc on a thread but I was really, really unnerved when I got a PM (from a poster never seen since) calling me horrible names. It felt really intrusive.

SoupDragon Wed 06-Jun-12 21:13:33

Yes, very helpful, Fanjo. That doesn't really solve it does it? i don't want to receive them, I used to be able to opt out, I can't now - backwards step. I have received ones which aren't nice and I would rather not get any.

Being able to opt out affects no one but the person opting out.

Sparklingbrook Wed 06-Jun-12 21:15:01

People send snotty PMs? I thought it was just for nice things. confused

OhNoMyFanjo Wed 06-Jun-12 21:15:05

Sorry just trying to lighten the mood......have you blocked her, have you had others as well?

GitAwfMayLend Wed 06-Jun-12 21:23:32

That is very low I think to send a PM with horrible things in.

I was really upset - hope you're OK soup.

Blocking them - well yes you can do that, but you have still had to read whatever someone has sent you.

SoupDragon Thu 07-Jun-12 07:34:50

Oh, I'm fine - it wasn't bad at all and I'm more robust than that but it reminded me that I have been asking for the option to opt out ever since PMs were introduced.

You can't block someone without reading the message.

tribpot Thu 07-Jun-12 07:41:28

Genuine question: is the ability to receive PMs a condition of use for MN? If not, at a minimum it is good practice for users to have control of their own privacy settings, surely?

If it's not technically feasible to make this a user configuration, presumably mailboxes could be disabled on request, as Soupy is doing now.

WishingRLwouldFuckOff Thu 07-Jun-12 07:46:42

I don't get email notifications so unless i were to click on the little yellow envelop i wouldn't know. Would be a temporary solution until the opt out system comes into affect? admittedly it would take will power that I don't possess

Northernlurker Thu 07-Jun-12 07:52:16

What kind of vile (and stupid) person sends horrible PMs? That must be very upsetting. I hope you reported the git and their backside was kicked to the back of beyond by HQ?

OhNoMyFanjo Thu 07-Jun-12 09:10:12

You can't block someone without reading the message.

I didn't realise that.

OhChristFENTON Thu 07-Jun-12 09:13:58

I've got a better idea, anyone sending a nasty pm should be instantly banned.

Seriously why would anyone do that? Appalling.

Groovee Thu 07-Jun-12 09:18:46

I've never had any snotty ones but I did notice someone saying yesterday they were now hiding the thread after a horrible PM from the OP because she didn't like what was being said. That to me is abuse and needs to be reported. Not sure what CATS are though/

tribpot Thu 07-Jun-12 09:23:12

CATS were Contact a Talker messages (I think), Groovee, the PM system from years ago.

I agree that anyone sending a nasty or abusive text should be banned, but as a point of principle, users should have the ability to control their own privacy settings, unless this is contrary to the rules of the site (and I can't see why they would be).

BIWItheBold Thu 07-Jun-12 09:26:39

There are a lot of cowardly people who will read/lurk threads and then only communicate with other MNetters via PM.

I have never understood why they don't post openly, or why they don't have the courage to post their views on the actual thread.

I agree with you Soupy, you should be able to turn off the PM option.

SandyMumsnet (MNHQ) Thu 07-Jun-12 12:35:33

Hi there,

We're very sorry to hear that some of you have received unpleasant PMs. That's not what Mumsnet's about.

Please do report them to us and we will take action.

Having an opting out system on PM's is most definitely a question for our Tech gurus. We will ask!


tribpot Thu 07-Jun-12 13:20:56

I'm sorry to keep carping on, SandyMN but I think this is more than a technical issue, there is a policy issue as well. The Privacy Policy doesn't cover the use of PMs and I think there should be an explicit statement about them in there, distinct from what the current forum software is able to do. I'm not a privacy nutter but this is an area where I would err on the side of caution.

Hullygully Thu 07-Jun-12 13:29:23

I did think pms were a bad thing in that people use them for unpleasantness, but there is fb, so they don't make much difference. But yes, should certianly have an opt out.

I also think anyone who receives a horrid one should C&P it on a thread.

JenaiMarrHePlaysGuitar Thu 07-Jun-12 13:32:22

Goodness, what kind of weirdo sends horrible PMs?

I've only had nice ones, and I loved those. But that's not because I'm all lovely and likeable or anything. Consulting my spreadsheet I see that neither Soup nor GOML have posted anything that warrants a "fuck off" let alone a lunatic PM. confused

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: