Cannot send a pm or view post history anymore?

[tynetunnel]

Go to the foot of any page and click "contact".

As per contentguy’s post, pressing the “contact” button gets the response shown below

Hidden Image/Members Only

[RAJEC]

This thread is so comical 

[Head1]

As per contentguy’s post, pressing the “contact” button gets the response shown below

Hidden Image/Members Only

This will be sorted 

[tynetunnel]

This will be sorted 

[workinallweek]

  mines back to normal

[dynatron]

all getting a bit silly i think

[daviemac]

all getting a bit silly i think

What is?? 

[NickA]

Hello. Maybe I missed the memo and not sure if anyone in an admin role can help. But I just logged into my messages to see the following heading:

Your account can only reply to messages recieved from other members, you cannot send messages to other members that have not contacted you before.

Just wondering if this was a new across-the-board rule or whether it's just me?

[GingerNuts]

Just wondering why you haven't read the thread pinned at the top of the page?

Cannot send a pm or view post history anymore?

[Fuzzyduck]

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=351038

[NickA]

Just wondering why you haven't read the thread pinned at the top of the page?

Cannot send a pm or view post history anymore?

Many thanks for pointing me in the right direction. Unfortunately, I'm not very bright, so this completely passed me by. Thanks again.

[daviemac]

Many thanks for pointing me in the right direction. Unfortunately, I'm not very bright, so this completely passed me by. Thanks again.

What's with the all capitals in the title?? it's classed as shouting on internet forums and bad manners.

Anyway I'll merge this with the correct thread.

[Lewis]

I’m getting the following message when I go to my PMs

“ Your account can only reply to messages recieved from other members, you cannot send messages to other members that have not contacted you before.”

I thought forum helpers didn’t have restrictions on sending PMs, as there might be the odd occasion to inform someone we’ve moved their post somewhere else for example.

[daviemac]

I’m getting the following message when I go to my PMs

“ Your account can only reply to messages recieved from other members, you cannot send messages to other members that have not contacted you before.”

I thought forum helpers didn’t have restrictions on sending PMs, as there might be the odd occasion to inform someone we’ve moved their post somewhere else for example.

Why would you need to send anyone a PM? if they look at their post history they will see it.   

[Lewis]

Why would you need to send anyone a PM? if they look at their post history they will see it.   

Sorry, perhaps I was just being polite and applying common courtesy, just like I do with other forums I help out / moderate.

For starters, it stops the newbie's who are still finding their way around the site posting a question of where their post has gone, and wasting further time.

Anyway, not got the option to do so anymore. Move along. Nothing to see here.

[WAY-WARD]

Received 2 Pms today, replied to both. Received a third and I'm not allowed to reply. Regardless of me posting a review less than 3 weeks ago I'm often restricted from sending PMs. Can a Forum Helper help me...as you're the only ones who know what the 'criteria' is that I don't conform to. Thanks

[GingerNuts]

Received 2 Pms today, replied to both. Received a third and I'm not allowed to reply. Regardless of me posting a review less than 3 weeks ago I'm often restricted from sending PMs. Can a Forum Helper help me...as you're the only ones who know what the 'criteria' is that I don't conform to. Thanks

You should read the thread.

Ok, what's the new criteria?

That isn't made public I'm afraid, but never be frightened to ask a question.   

This is why there's a restriction on being able to send PMs and how many you can send:

On your second point the the forum is here to help like minded users, so perhaps you can explain how that can be achieved if information is shared privately between only two people as against posted on the open forum to benefit all members.   

[WAY-WARD]

I have read the thread and it's rather long and uninformative.
The PMs are related to WGs who have retired and therefore of no interest to anyone else.

[GingerNuts]

I have read the thread and it's rather long and uninformative.
The PMs are related to WGs who have retired and therefore of no interest to anyone else.

I've done my best to inform you and I doubt things are going to change so you can discusss retired WGs privately. You could start a thread on the subject if there isn't one already.

[90125]

I have read the thread and it's rather long and uninformative.
The PMs are related to WGs who have retired and therefore of no interest to anyone else.

Then exchange email details or WhatsApp numbers with the members you want to have ongoing chat with. Sounds stalkish wanting to chat about retired SP's and a subject we wouldn't want to discuss here anyway.

[Thephoenix]

I have read the thread and it's rather long and uninformative.
The PMs are related to WGs who have retired and therefore of no interest to anyone else.

There's a thread on NW board entitled Manchester nostalgia which is mainly about retired WG, and it's got nearly 150 posts.

During the lockdown, there was an even longer one if I remember relating to Merseyside.

It might surprise you how much interest it developed as there's a lot of old codgers who have long punting memories, and although their activities may now be restricted because of age etc, they obviously still like to reminisce.

If there's not one in your region, why not start one?

Oop! Already been suggested.

[PumpDump]

Is this message which I received today linked to the new criteria:

"You have reached the anti-spam limit of 1 members you can contact per 12 hours. Try again later."

I replied to two PMs from two different members, member #1 and member #2. Then when I tried to reply to a further message from member #1 I got the message. Doesn't make sense as I was already replied to both of them prior to receiving the message.

[WAY-WARD]

Is this message which I received today linked to the new criteria:

"You have reached the anti-spam limit of 1 members you can contact per 12 hours. Try again later."

I replied to two PMs from two different members, member #1 and member #2. Then when I tried to reply to a further message from member #1 I got the message. Doesn't make sense as I was already replied to both of them prior to receiving the message.

EXACTLY

[PumpDump]

EXACTLY

Well either the message is wrong or the logic is wrong as I was allowed to reply to two members.

[WAY-WARD]

And you'll be asked to read the thread which is just members asking why they can't send PMs and where has their reviews gone.
Can you imagine how long the thread will be this time next year and we still won't know who can do what and why.

[scutty brown]

Is this message which I received today linked to the new criteria:

"You have reached the anti-spam limit of 1 members you can contact per 12 hours. Try again later."

I replied to two PMs from two different members, member #1 and member #2. Then when I tried to reply to a further message from member #1 I got the message. Doesn't make sense as I was already replied to both of them prior to receiving the message.

The actual blocking messages have been wrong for a long time, take no heed of what they say: the simple fact is you've hit the limit you're allowed to send. I'm sure the messages are just another item in the queue to get fixed.
But even if you could create new PMs you'd still be limited anyway - for instance I seem to have a limit of three people and/or three messages per 24 hours. Nothing to get excited about, certainly not enough to set up a secret chat board. And that's the point: there is no real need for secrecy. Or if there is a reason for something to be secret, it's best not said at all

[scutty brown]

And you'll be asked to read the thread which is just members asking why they can't send PMs and where has their reviews gone.
Can you imagine how long the thread will be this time next year and we still won't know who can do what and why.

That's the whole point: you're not supposed to know
If it was common knowledge we'd have a repeat of people making spam posts to hit the targets

[PumpDump]

And you'll be asked to read the thread which is just members asking why they can't send PMs and where has their reviews gone.
Can you imagine how long the thread will be this time next year and we still won't know who can do what and why.

I've worked out two things
1) You are only allowed to send one PM to each of two members in 12 hours, that is 2 PMs in total. After that you have to wait 12 hours to send another PM.
2) The error message you see when you try to send a third PM is inaccurate.

Seems the PM facility is not longer fit for any purpose.

[daviemac]

Seems the PM facility is not longer fit for any purpose.

What purpose is it meant to be fit for? It's been made very clear over several threads that the idea of the site is to benefit ALL members, not for information to be shared privately between a select few. A click of a button turns it off totally for any member.

[PumpDump]

What purpose is it meant to be fit for? It's been made very clear over several threads that the idea of the site is to benefit ALL members, not for information to be shared privately between a select few. A click of a button turns it off totally for any member.

Ok, what is it supposed to be used for then? Can you tell us it's purpose?

[daviemac]

Ok, what is it supposed to be used for then? Can you tell us it's purpose?

The PM facility is a privilege not a right. Try reading the first post in this thread.

Many of you will have found that you cannot send a pm anymore or read a person's post history.
It's not a site error because the criteria for having these privileges have changed.

Before, you needed to reach "X" amount of contribution to the site. It was all about numbers, not about time. This was a flawed idea, unfair to the new members and gave privilege to members who had contributed well but not recently.

Now the pm and ph have different criteria to be gained. Both of which are easily manageable and will lead to a much better and more informative site which benefits us all.

[PumpDump]

The PM facility is a privilege not a right. Try reading the first post in this thread.

Yes I understand that. But I am unsure what the privilege is. What exactly is the privilege one gains by having access to PMs?

[scutty brown]

Yes I understand that. But I am unsure what the privilege is. What exactly is the privilege one gains by having access to PMs?

Surely the privilege of sending a limited number of messages.
If you don't see that as a privilege then don't use it

[PumpDump]

Guys, why are you treating anyone who asks questions like a naughty child? We are not enemies here. Just contributing members who don't understand something as clearly as you guys do and asking questions. Are we not allowed to ask questions?

I for one don't understand how a system which only allows you send one PM per day can be useful. You can send a member a PM, they reply (if they haven't already used their 1 PM quota), you are then prevented replying to them again for 12 hours. Surely this is a bug in the system. If it is intentional then I think it is OTT but I will comment no further.
 

[scutty brown]

Guys, why are you treating anyone who asks questions like a naughty child? We are not enemies here. Just contributing members who don't understand something as clearly as you guys do and asking questions. Are we not allowed to ask questions?

I for one don't understand how a system which only allows you send one PM per day can be useful. You can send a member a PM, they reply (if they haven't already used their 1 PM quota), you are then prevented replying to them again for 12 hours. Surely this is a bug in the system. If it is intentional then I think it is OTT but I will comment no further.

From what you've said it seems to be working as expected

[PumpDump]

Many of you will have found that you cannot send a pm anymore or read a person's post history.
It's not a site error because the criteria for having these privileges have changed.

Before, you needed to reach "X" amount of contribution to the site. It was all about numbers, not about time. This was a flawed idea, unfair to the new members and gave privilege to members who had contributed well but not recently.

Now the pm and ph have different criteria to be gained. Both of which are easily manageable and will lead to a much better and more informative site which benefits us all.

Hi Head1,

Are there different levels of PM access or same for everyone? I notice for me it seems to be two PMs per day (one PM to two different members).

[daviemac]

Yes I understand that. But I am unsure what the privilege is. What exactly is the privilege one gains by having access to PMs?

You've lost me, first you complain that the PM facility isn't fit for purpose but then say you don't know what you would gain by having access to the system.

It is what it is and there's even been a rule introduced to combat the sharing of information privately.

33 Access to sending Private Messages and the visibility of Members Post history have different criteria to be gained. The criteria will not be made public. Anyone attempting to circumvent the PM criteria by requesting PM’s may receive a ban.

[PumpDump]

.. there's even been a rule introduced to combat the sharing of information privately...

Thanks for that, it is what I wanted to know. Now I understand 

[WAY-WARD]

I've had PMs in the past from people asking about a review I've written..."did she go my a different name before" and I've told them to ask the question in the review section rather than PM me. Especially as in the review it clear I've never met her before so obviously I wouldn't know what name she may have used before or what colour her hair was once etc etc. Where as someone else might know and could answer such questions. So it's not like I'm trying to be secretive.
On the other hand myself or someone else may have started a thread which quickly turned cold and it's only the two of us who have an interest in the topic. In these cases PMs are useful. Information that is of no value to anyone else can be exchanged, stuff that would not necessarily be suited to open forum. But nothing sinister or illegal.
So now you have a 'buddy' who you may only speak with from time to time so if you were allowed say, 30 PMs a month, that would be ample whereas 2 PMs in a 12 hour period can be very restrictive.

[lewisjones23]

have at various points received warning messages saying I didn’t have PM access or whatever it says, curiously it was at the top of my inbox so I wasn’t even trying to send a message at that time.

Can’t say it has changed the way I use the forum and I cba trying to figure out what the trigger criteria is to get around it

[90125]

Looks like members are playing a game of 20 questions to reveal the criteria. Suggest you stop now before you lose all forum access permanently.

[Thephoenix]

Some folk just don't seem to know when to wind their necks in.

We don't know what the criteria is and that's it.

Sometimes curiosity kills the cat.

[Fuzzyduck]

Some folk just don't seem to know when to wind their necks in.

We don't know what the criteria is and that's it.

Sometimes curiosity kills the cat.

It's the sense of entitlement that gets me.

[myothernameis]

It's the sense of entitlement that gets me.

Even more when you have a member who has been here 8 years plus.  And in a thread ask's a for pm, with regards a party event.

Do members not know the rules, or just acting dumb, and think, I might get away with this

[timmy1]

Ive been wanting to ask a certain member something  that i dont think warrants me bumping a year old thread or creating my own, been on many a forum throughout the years and never seen this rule implemented before

[myothernameis]

never seen this rule implemented before

Think rule 33 has more to do with, members not wanting to share, or using the pm facility is used for the wrong reasons.  As for your self and contacting the other member, you might be better doing what you think is best, new thread, or bump old thread

[daviemac]

Ive been wanting to ask a certain member something  that i dont think warrants me bumping a year old thread or creating my own, been on many a forum throughout the years and never seen this rule implemented before

As we're sick of posting a reminder of the rules every time a member asks for a PM we issue an automatic 14 day ban for anyone who asks.

[advent2016]

As we're sick of posting a reminder of the rules every time a member asks for a PM we issue an automatic 14 day ban for anyone who asks.

I can send limited PMs. I don't send or receive many, probably only once or twice a year.

I don't want to get a ban!

I want to reply to a PM from a forum helper.
Do I have to wait 12 hours and does he/she have to wait 12 hours to reply to me.  - I just want to understand the time. I'm fine by abiding. I like to plan stuff.

If I PM a moderator do the same rules apply? presumably not, although I did get the message when I tried to PM Daviemac
I don't think I'm  attempting to circumvent / reveal inner workings of the PM system.

I realise I can use the contact button, but I want to converse with a particular forum_helper about a technical subject and that might be long winded if the person on the end of the contact form has to send it to the person, they reply and it is sent back. That would seem to me to be an abuse of the contact system.

I don't want to take the discussion outside UKP as that might mean revealing real(other fake) email addresses and unintended consequences.

[scutty brown]

I can send limited PMs. I don't send or receive many, probably only once or twice a year.

I don't want to get a ban!

I want to reply to a PM from a forum helper.
Do I have to wait 12 hours and does he/she have to wait 12 hours to reply to me.  - I just want to understand the time. I'm fine by abiding. I like to plan stuff.

If I PM a moderator do the same rules apply? presumably not, although I did get the message when I tried to PM Daviemac
I don't think I'm  attempting to circumvent / reveal inner workings of the PM system.

I realise I can use the contact button, but I want to converse with a particular forum_helper about a technical subject and that might be long winded if the person on the end of the contact form has to send it to the person, they reply and it is sent back. That would seem to me to be an abuse of the contact system.

I don't want to take the discussion outside UKP as that might mean revealing real(other fake) email addresses and unintended consequences.

If you're replying to a PM sent to you it should just work with no delays, though I expect you'll find you're limited in the number you can send in a day - probably three

[daviemac]

If you're replying to a PM sent to you it should just work with no delays, though I expect you'll find you're limited in the number you can send in a day - probably three

Ah right, OK.