Thanks Dov and certainly appreciate the reasonable information you have posted. Some or most of these thoughts have not been contained in the various threads -- which i posted in an above reply -- so it does bring some new information to the table and that's appreciated. As well, it's always appreciated if some members do read the back pages (hey, I fully appreciate that with the sad shape that search is in that there may be other threads i wasn't able to find) and pause at times to see the background from which some things are acted on. But given that some do not, I'll do my best to take into consideration yours and others feedback and balance that against the best interests of other members. Dov, you of all members know that the best interests of some members is not always the best interest of others and at times there are simply judgment calls as to whose best interest one goes with. Dies it absolutely mean that the other best interest' are not accounted for? Not really, it just means that you can please some of the members some of the time, but not all the members all the time. I'll still try and please most members all the time and I won't be distracted from that goal.
Here's a footnote that i included in a reply to another member yesterday by PM -- like many issues on FlyerTalk, I personally don't have any stake in it. I am totally ambivalent to the issue - preferring to remain quite independent and measuring any action in a balance of what is the best interests of various groups of members (yes, you all really don't think alike!) and the best interests of trying the manage a very popular meeting place on the Internet for the purpose of talking travel. So, please continue to discuss the issue and let the issue determine its future, not I. Thanks.
Originally Posted by
Dovster
Randy, getting rid of invisibility does not address the question of shadowing another member. If someone is so inclined, he can do it by simply logging out. Then there will be no record of what he viewed.
And, for that matter, I don't see shadowing as a problem unless it is being done to harrass that member (eg: posting a negative reply whenever he says anything). Of course, if someone does do that the posts that he makes are proof of what he has done.
If what Mary2E has posted is correct ("for no apparent reason except to make it easy for the mods/admins to see when someone last logged in"), I again can not see the advantage in it. Why do mods/admins have to know when I last logged in? If I have not violated the TOS -- which would be impossible without my either posting or sending a particularly vile PM -- there is no need for anyone to know when I have been on line. If I have violated the TOS, my action itself provides the proof.
The last issue is the one you raised about a member ignoring a PM and claiming that he never got it. That is, of course, possible but to carry it off the member would have to effectively give himself a permanent ban.
I am in invisible mode right now. If I get a PM I will see it. If I claim not to, the simple fact that I made this post (which is time stamped) is proof that I was logged in. If I am willing never to post again just to ignore that PM I can not be doing anything which will cause the mods or admin any trouble.