Are private messages

[Mackey Mouse]

I am a moderator on these boards.. have been since 2000... I cannot read nor have I ever accessed pm's sent by other posters. NEVER

 

[mudnuri]

I think if you read further, you'll see he says he doesn't need that particular hack to read PM's. I don't beleive he has commented one way or the other on whether or not he has read any.

 

[Chipmunk89]

I am sorry I dont know if you are trying just to keep things light or not but I really find your posts to be a distraction to the conversation at hand.

Yes, I'm trying to keep it light. Because you would have to be either a complete moron or totally naive to believe anything you put on the net, in emails, or in a PM is really private. Come on, people! Get with the program. There is always a "higher power" that has the ability to monitor messages to "protect" it's users from evil doers, spammers, etc. Puh-lease!

PS.-If you find my posts distracting, you can aways ignore them & me.

 

[tw1nsmom]

I don't think so, actually, and thank you for raising these issues...

I don't remember all the details, but this was a big issue a few years ago, with respect to what extent operators of communications systems are required to monitor the data that they have on their servers to ensure that their systems are not being used to support criminal activity. Claims that the service provider was respecting a promise of privacy were rejected by the courts and the service providers are subject sanction as accessories to the criminal activity. At the same time, encryption available from non-US sources surpassed what the US would allow for export, thereby nullifying the effect of the export restriction, which was soon thereafter lifted. With encryption readily available and internationally consistent, many services started supporting encrypted private communications, so that service providers could not view the private communications even if they wanted to.

I also just want to point out that my previous post was only in reference to the legalities of office communications. I don't know the exact laws and legal precedence that cover message boards.

It's highly likely that the owners of message boards have the legal right to look at all messages (private or public) on their boards. I certainly don't know if this is happening here.

However, it seems to me that there are some other legalities involved when it comes to discloser. This is a public forum, but one that accepts sponsorship and thus makes some of it's members paying customers. It seems that they would need to disclose if the messages were being read or not. If the PM's were being read, and punishments being handed out due to content it would seem that they would be required to disclose that fact. Otherwise it may seem that the people behind the message board was harassing the punished members through false intent/identity.

If they only get to read objectionable emails through being forwarded them by people complaining (as they say...and I have no proof that that's not true), then they are disclosing the process and aren't doing anything under false pretenses. However, if a message board owner/administrator were to continually deny that they read pm's and they were in fact doing so and subsequently punishing people to to said pm's content, then a person could feel harassed by someone under false pretenses/identity. Not that it's a direct link, but look at the recent arrest of the mother who harassed that girl (who subsequently killed herself) under a false identity.

Again, I have no proof, or reason, to believe that that's the case here.

 

[bicker]

I agree with this statement, until we get a clear explanation of what people can and cant do, until why people were banned, the atmosphere of confusion, paranoia, and suspicision will continue.

I disagree. I believe most DISboards members aren't paranoid or suspicious, and are just continuing to enjoy this service as we always have.

Confused... yes... but not about what I think you're saying we're confused about.

 

[Allison]

I disagree. I believe most DISboards members aren't paranoid or suspicious, and are just continuing to enjoy this service as we always have.

Confused... yes... but not about what I think you're saying we're confused about.

I just have to keep agreeing with you today.

 

[bicker]

Yes, I'm trying to keep it light. Because you would have to be either a complete moron or totally naive to believe anything you put on the net, in emails, or in a PM is really private. Come on, people! Get with the program. There is always a "higher power" that has the ability to monitor messages to "protect" it's users from evil doers, spammers, etc. Puh-lease!

This is a good point, and one I really glossed over myself in some of my earlier messages. Remember that when you read a PM, every server between your workstation and the DISboards app server is also reading the message at the same time. Anyone with the kind of access that Alex and Verio has on any of those servers could read what you're reading. Without clarifying why you'd expect that Alex and/or Verio would be specifically interested in what you're reading, there is no reason to be more concerned about them versus those at these other intermediary servers or your own ISP's servers.

 

[bicker]

I just have to keep agreeing with you today.

It doesn't hurt too much, does it?

 

[Allison]

It doesn't hurt too much, does it?

Just slightly (kidding)

 

[bicker]

However, it seems to me that there are some other legalities involved when it comes to discloser. This is a public forum, but one that accepts sponsorship and thus makes some of it's members paying customers. It seems that they would need to disclose if the messages were being read or not.

From the Terms of Service:

"The Company reserves the right to monitor any User's transmissions when deemed necessary for providing proper service and/or to protect the rights and property of the Company, or in order to comply with the law."

Again, I have no proof, or reason, to believe that that's the case here.

Indeed.

 

[tw1nsmom]

From the Terms of Service:

"The Company reserves the right to monitor any User's transmissions when deemed necessary for providing proper service and/or to protect the rights and property of the Company, or in order to comply with the law."

Indeed.

Well, there you go. They have no need to deny that they read PM's. I wonder why they continue to do so?

 

[bicker]

There is a difference between what they're allowed to do and what they do.

 

[ZekeKelso]

Without clarifying why you'd expect that Alex and/or Verio would be specifically interested in what you're reading,

Sorry, left my 10 foot poll at home today....

You aren't trying to bait people into saying things that will get them banned are you? That wouldn't be nice.

 

[Wishing on a star]

From the Terms of Service:

"The Company reserves the right to monitor any User's transmissions when deemed necessary for providing proper service and/or to protect the rights and property of the Company, or in order to comply with the law."

BINGO!!!!!

I kind of resent the fact that terms like paranoid and suspicious are being thrown around here... Especially in light of history and current events. Anyone's concerns in this regard are well founded.

It is unreasonable to think that ANYTHING on the net, especially privately owned forums, are somehow guaranteed as private. Anyone who thinks so is really kidding themselves.

 

[dananbethany]

Well, there you go. They have no need to deny that they read PM's. I wonder why they continue to do so?

Er, because they're probably not? I've seen this kind of Big Brother paranoia on so many boards it's not even funny. And while they have the right to run their board as they see fit including reading PMs if they so desire, I can't see why in the world anyone would want to sit there and read through millions of PMs just to get one person in trouble.

I'd give up the paranoia and just go back to enjoying the board for the reason it's here - to meet other Disney lovers - and quit worrying about whether someone might be watching you...private eyes...they see - doggone it! Who posted that song and now it won't leave my head?

 

[maddymouse]

BINGO!!!!!

I kind of resent the fact that terms like paranoid and suspicious are being thrown around here... Especially in light of history and current events. Anyone's concerns in this regard are well founded.

It is unreasonable to think that ANYTHING on the net, especially privately owned forums, are somehow guaranteed as private. Anyone who thinks so is really kidding themselves.

DING ding ding, we have a winner folks, step up and claim your prize!

 

[Loubon]

I do find it interesting that when people raise questions on how things are run (and believe me it is more than just a select few lately), they are deemed paranoid, suspicious, must be up to no good and don't know what they are talking about. Yet when a handful of posters (not talking about Mods or WMs here) seem to be very certain that these people are wrong that is expected to just be accepted as fact.

I know how the technology works and I know the legal aspect. That doesn't mean I have any way of knowing whether someone has done this or not. If people who have been trustworthy posters up to this point have raised legitimate concerns I'm not sure why they are being dismissed out of hand.

 

[Chipmunk89]

Well, there you go. They have no need to deny that they read PM's. I wonder why they continue to do so?

I call it the "Star Jones Theory".

 

[Lovin' Lorne]

From the Terms of Service:

"The Company reserves the right to monitor any User's transmissions when deemed necessary for providing proper service and/or to protect the rights and property of the Company, or in order to comply with the law."

All of this has me wondering how many people actually read the TOS/Licensing Agreements when they join websites, or download things like Quicktime, media players etc... I know that I get about 1/4 of the way through them, go yeah whatever and dive right in. It would be silly to think that a company, public or private, didn't have something written into their TOS/LA that didn't give the owners carte blanche to protect their investments.

 

[Allison]

I do find it interesting that when people raise questions on how things are run (and believe me it is more than just a select few lately), they are deemed paranoid, suspicious, must be up to no good and don't know what they are talking about.

A poster who is requesting the information is the one who mentioned an atmosphere of paranoia, confusion and suspicion.