or at least add the option to purge it, i dont want the government up in my business ok

8/17/2009 11:36:17 PM

i too want a delete pm function

8/17/2009 11:39:58 PM

the current database structure doesn't support it. also, if it were changed to accommodate this reasonable request, there's a question of who owns the content once you send it. if you delete a message you sent, the other people will still have their copy. and even though this is the norm for email, i'm not sure all tdubbers would understand this is how it would work, and would have expectations otherwise. especially considering most people's motivations for purging deleted PMs would be to eliminate troublesome conversations.

8/17/2009 11:44:14 PM

i am pretty sure tdubbers would understand how it works if you told them "its just like email"

8/17/2009 11:47:33 PM

the couple times i've had users ask me to remove PMs, they didn't naturally reach that conclusion, or understand the problems with effectively deleting messages from other people's inboxes (even if it was a message they sent)

[Edited on August 17, 2009 at 11:52 PM. Reason : not saying it couldn't or shouldn't be done, it's just a concern i have, and i know would come up]

8/17/2009 11:51:50 PM

in other words, its approaching pointlessness

all it would take is a simple sql query to find any pm you sent/received...assuming the man could subpoena database access as opposed to only your login

8/18/2009 12:03:25 AM

couldnt there be some kind of global code that will purge anyone's inbox once deleted emails reach something like 10 pages disregarding who sent it?

or is the last part impossible

8/18/2009 8:48:15 AM

hey do premium users still have pop3 mail

hey do people who used to be premium users when pop3 was introduced as a feature still have pop3

8/18/2009 8:58:49 AM

does this cut down on wasted server space (or did i just noob all over myself)?

8/18/2009 6:31:09 PM

lol he said features

8/18/2009 6:54:26 PM

^^^ no

7/19/2010 1:56:08 PM

if theres the question of who owns the PM after its sent, then why not delete all PMs, send a mass PM to everyone stating whatever you decide as who is owner after a message is sent, and let them dig their graves from there?

7/19/2010 2:02:52 PM

so some people use the deleted folder as an Archive area, and some people use the deleted folder in the true sense of deleted - they are done with it and will never look at it again

so what i'll do is rename the deleted folder to "Archive" and add a real delete button. so if you're reading a PM and want to keep it, but just not in your inbox, you can move it to the Archive folder. If you're done with it, there will be a delete button, and it will be gone forever.

should be pretty easy for everybody. any objections, alternatives?

7/19/2010 2:14:36 PM

To be honest, I'd much rather you work on improving response times in the mailbox before you start enhancing it.

I never had to sit and wait so long as when I change back and forth between inbox and sent.

I'm sure this has to do with efficiency and caches and all that crap. I don't want to hear those lame excuses ok

[Edited on July 19, 2010 at 2:26 PM. Reason : ]

7/19/2010 2:26:15 PM

yeh, provide a real delete function... it doesn't matter that it works like email and that one user will still have a copy, but deletion is key.

7/19/2010 2:28:59 PM

sounds pretty good to me

7/19/2010 4:45:04 PM

sounds good. go on with it

7/19/2010 6:06:32 PM

i didnt realize people even bothered using the delete to "archive"

it's kinda pointless

7/22/2010 11:02:30 AM

if you want to archive just leave it in the inbox

7/23/2010 9:21:33 AM

Dear Fred,

Please install a DELETE button that actually deletes PMs from your personal account, and not just archives them. (This is not a request to purge the content permanently from the database.)

It's 2010, and everyone knows how email works. Everyone knows that when you delete an email from your email account, it does not delete copies that have been sent to others. People should know by now that if they post something electronically, via email or forum or other medium, the content may come back years later. That's their problem to deal with.

Most people want to be able to purge their copies of old PMs/emails, to at least have some measure of security for their own account in case of unauthorized access. To not have a delete feature available for your own PM/email account seems counter-intuitive.

Thanks for considering,

Joe






[Edited on August 18, 2010 at 10:26 PM. Reason : ]

8/18/2010 10:18:46 PM

thank you for reading this thread

I'm AstralAdvent and i approved this message.

8/18/2010 10:54:09 PM

Quote :

"the current database structure doesn't support it. also, if it were changed to accommodate this reasonable request, there's a question of who owns the content once you send it. if you delete a message you sent, the other people will still have their copy. and even though this is the norm for email, i'm not sure all tdubbers would understand this is how it would work, and would have expectations otherwise. especially considering most people's motivations for purging deleted PMs would be to eliminate troublesome conversations."

I'm AstralAdvent and i approved this message.

8/18/2010 10:56:04 PM

^I just don't want my shit boogered up with worthless pms.

8/18/2010 11:39:05 PM

^^Indeed i read all of that and quite understand. but I'm glad you took the time to bold font the aspects that have zero bearing on the position i presented. So here, let me isolate a few key phrases and supply relevant commentary for your consideration:

Quote :

"if it were changed to accommodate this reasonable request "

it's a good idea that makes sense in most of the world

Quote :

"i'm not sure all tdubbers would understand this is how it would work"

but unfortunately you're too fucking stupid to get it.


my position OTOH takes the optimist standpoint: that most people here are smart enough to understand how deleting PMs works, considering every other message forum operates this way, and for those few who are congenitally retarded.... well, it's 2010 and it's time we left them behind.

8/19/2010 1:50:55 AM

calm down old man

i already said i'm going to implement it

8/19/2010 8:26:19 AM

Quote :

"but unfortunately you're too fucking stupid to get it."

Easy turbo. Insulting the one guy who can implement the solution you ask for generally isn't the best way to get what you want.

Everything you've expressed here is your opinion on what the user interface landscape of email interaction is. You're completely discounting the fact that with the advent and growing popularity of inboxes without message limits, the usage patterns of mail on the web have changed dramatically.

Quote :

"It's 2010, and everyone knows how email works. Everyone knows that when you delete an email from your email account, it does not delete copies that have been sent to others. People should know by now that if they post something electronically, via email or forum or other medium, the content may come back years later. That's their problem to deal with."

This is patently false. Everyone does NOT know how email works. There are tons of people who struggle with Gmail's threaded email sorting paradigm after being exposed to other, previously considered "standard" email interaction patterns.

Not to mention that if you were to take a poll of each person who used Gmail, you'd find that they all use it slightly differently. Some archived read items. Some leave them in their inbox. Some leave items they aren't interested in reading marked as unread. Some use stars. Some people use labels. There's probably millions of usage variations based on just those few groups alone.

Take it one step further and you'll see the same sorts of individually different behaviors from Outlook, Eudora, and Thunderbird users.



I'm of the opinion that unless a hard limit is imposed on how many PMs a user can have in their inbox/sent/deleted/archived space, then there's no need to get all up in arms because you can't "delete" your PMs. In fact, if qntmfred just changed the "Deleted" label to "Archived," it would do a lot to change what your expectations were.

There are still tons of things he has to work out in this age that weren't ever even considered by any of the previous ownership groups. Does TheWolfWeb own all of the content posted disseminated here? Does the user? If TheWolfWeb does, is qntmfred compelled to keep any and all information posted for a certain amount of time?

In short: It's a lot more complex than just making a "delete" button, and qntmfred is trying to make sure he navigates his way properly through the potholes left behind by previous owners who didn't know what the fuck they were doing. Get off of his back and cut him some slack.

8/19/2010 10:55:40 AM

Quote :

"Everyone does NOT know how email works."

this is no excuse to not press on. people will catch up, and I bet you the majority of people on here know how email works and what deleted means and what archived means.

Quote :

"In fact, if qntmfred just changed the "Deleted" label to "Archived," it would do a lot to change what your expectations were. "

well yeh, if it was labeled correctly, I would expect it to perform as labeled. currently it's not deleted, it's archived, thus it's labeled wrong and is essentially useless on forums. and this wouldn't change our request or need for a delete function.

Quote :

"there's no need to get all up in arms because you can't "delete" your PMs."

people have valid reasons for wanting a delete function.


I won't berate ken for not implementing this already or faster, though I wish it was something that was taken care of asap.

8/19/2010 12:29:08 PM

Quote :

"though I wish it was something that was taken care of asap"

i did spend a little while on it a few weeks ago, but ran into some issue that prevented me from finishing. i might look at it again in the next couple days, but in general, i'm not trying to do any more bug fixes or feature requests on the existing codebase unless i can do it in under an hour or so. it's just not flexible enough, and i'd rather spend my time porting to v3

8/19/2010 12:47:26 PM

Understood captain. That's kind of what I meant (just the ability to code it), in addition to your priorities.

8/19/2010 1:02:46 PM

qntmfred,

sorry for misunderstanding. somehow I missed your post where you said you are going to implement it.

and FTR, when i said "youre too stupid to get it" i was referring to AstralAdvent.







[Edited on August 19, 2010 at 3:54 PM. Reason : ]

8/19/2010 3:53:39 PM