Full Messenger prevents sending of messages

[BenMillard]

Just popped by and noticed the Myriad Islands City Council (MICC) group has been removed.

 

I have 1,350 PMs stored from being a global moderator, led-by, project organiser, gang co-leader and various other roles at one time or another. Making my PM box "bottomless" is the most time-effective way to ensure these messages stay archived for future reference. Please may I have that reinstated?

 

I remember mentioning the PM problem to the staff when I was moved from Fun World Modders to MICC and they fixed it. I would have reminded them about this before it happened had I seen a public topic proposing removal of the MICC group.

 

As I recall, the absence of lengthy public discussion on the forums before altering the MICC group was considered a big problem by the staff earlier this year. How come they didn't follow their own advice before making this much more radical change?

Edited May 9, 2007 by Cerbera

[anuj]

You don't post for three months and you act surprised when things get taken away?

[Justin]

 

Surely you can keep some of those 1,350 in an email attachment rather than requiring them on-hand in the board's messenger...

[Ben]

As I recall, the absence of lengthy public discussion on the forums before altering the MICC group was considered a big problem by the staff earlier this year. How come they didn't follow their own advice before making this much more radical change?

As I recall, that was in an entirely different context to the removal of the group...

 

Not to mention that even the group was removed, permission masks for active ledbys area leaders were changed to enable them to keep their ledby area leader status (where applicable).

[GT-1]

The changes were made quite a while back, the fact that you have only just found out is exactly the reason I didn't wait for a reply before changing your groups. PM inboxes are assigned on a group basis, since you are inactive and no longer part of any projects/staff you belong in the members group.

 

Lastly, for your information removing people from groups doesn't take much discussion at all. When people start moving into groups and have power, then there are certain things to take onboard as was discussed in the topic you're silently referring to. The archive PM's is a useful feature if you need to free up some room in your PM inbox.

[Tsuroki]

[Raindancer]

[Tsuroki]

Oh snap. I see what u did thar.

[BenMillard]

 

Surely you can keep some of those 1,350 in an email attachment rather than requiring them on-hand in the board's messenger...

I would need to archive at least 1,301 messages to have a working messenger. You can archive a maximum of 50 messages each time you run the tool. I would need to run the tool at least 26 times in order to have a working PM box. This would be very time-consuming.

 

When I was making the Conventional skins I tested the archiving system extensively. I found that the format of archived PMs is not equivalent to the forum version. Particularly with older messages. These make the messages unreliable and non-authoritative. So if past staff messages were needed to help inform a new decision (such as one about Demarest or GT-1) these useful messages might not be considered reliable enough.

 

Without an operational messenger, I can neither receive nor answer queries about GTA modding. I am also unable to interact with the staff without creating a public discussion, such as this one. As I understand it, the staff prefer certain conversations to be done through PM but their decision with the PM limit means I am, regretfully, unable to do this.

 

As such, it is important that the messages remain in my messenger and that the message limit be lifted from it, as it has been for several years. If the staff cannot find a way to remove the message limit on a per-user basis, they will need to find another way to do it.

 

I am disappointed that some staff members are not taking this problem seriously. But am hopeful they will resolve it properly, as has been done on all previous occassions.

Edited May 11, 2007 by Cerbera

[fred]

 

I would need to archive at least 1,301 messages to have a working messenger. You can archive a maximum of 50 messages each time you run the tool. I would need to run the tool at least 26 times in order to have a working PM box. This would be very time-consuming.

I've just tried out the archiving tool and it's as fast as loading any page. I doubt using the back button and resubmitting 25 times would take more than a minute or two at the most. It would certainly take a fraction of the time it'd take us to try and get you a bigger personal limit.

 

If for any reason (and I can't think of any) we did need to verify an archived message, I'm sure it wouldn't be too much trouble to look into an old database backup. Your personal dislike of the archived format doesn't justify either giving you your own member group or hacking into the code an individual limit.

[Wheelman]

 

I would need to run the tool at least 26 times in order to have a working PM box. This would be very time-consuming.

But probably less time consuming than arguing about it, right?

[Alfresco]

STFU CERBWANG!!

 

Done.

[Funk3h]

Meh. Yes, you were a moderator, and were part of other groups. You're not now.

 

Just archive or delete them, don't see why you need that many now.

[BenMillard]

 

I've just tried out the archiving tool and it's as fast as loading any page.

So it fails 50% of the time after sitting around for a minute or two?

 

I doubt using the back button and resubmitting 25 times would take more than a minute or two at the most.

It would.

 

It would certainly take a fraction of the time it'd take us to try and get you a bigger personal limit.

Given that using the form would take longer than you think, the more timely option would shift towards making the change to my account. Particularly when you consider the archiving has to be done every 50 messages: I usually answer a lot of PM queries about modding.

 

 

If for any reason (and I can't think of any) we did need to verify an archived message, I'm sure it wouldn't be too much trouble to look into an old database backup.

It would be easier to change one account one time than look through old database backups each time, surely?

 

 

Your personal dislike of the archived format...

It is not "personal dislike", as I explained. Archiving to an e-mail inbox in 50-message lumps whose format doesn't match that of the main forum is inferior to keeping the messages in the forum system's native format.

 

...doesn't justify either giving you your own member group or hacking into the code an individual limit.

Unlike the "individual limit" which prevents my account from reporting messages, you mean?

 

Would giving unlimited PMs to the Members account be feasible? People have unlimited thread-based messages already, so I think it would be. You know the backend much better than I, though.

 

 

I would need to run the tool at least 26 times in order to have a working PM box. This would be very time-consuming.

But probably less time consuming than arguing about it, right?IRONY BONUS!

[anuj]

 

I've just tried out the archiving tool and it's as fast as loading any page.

So it fails 50% of the time after sitting around for a minute or two?

 

No, it works just as fast as every other page. If it took you a month to reply, I suggest contacting your internet service provider and kindly asking them to remove their penises from their hardware.

 

 

 

I doubt using the back button and resubmitting 25 times would take more than a minute or two at the most.

It would.

 

You had almost a month to do it. Even if took you an hour a day, you could've just set aside one hour each day and it would've been done by now.

 

 

 

 

It would certainly take a fraction of the time it'd take us to try and get you a bigger personal limit.

Given that using the form would take longer than you think, the more timely option would shift towards making the change to my account. Particularly when you consider the archiving has to be done every 50 messages: I usually answer a lot of PM queries about modding.

 

Yeah, I hate to hammer on a single point but you didn't reply to this topic since May 11th. Jesus Christ you are not as popular as you may be inclined to believe.

 

 

 

If for any reason (and I can't think of any) we did need to verify an archived message, I'm sure it wouldn't be too much trouble to look into an old database backup.

It would be easier to change one account one time than look through old database backups each time, surely?

 

You know, maybe. But you really aren't worth the trouble especially when we can have fun snooping around DBs.

 

 

 

Your personal dislike of the archived format...

It is not "personal dislike", as I explained. Archiving to an e-mail inbox in 50-message lumps whose format doesn't match that of the main forum is inferior to keeping the messages in the forum system's native format.

 

Maybe your problem is with IPB and not GTAForums?

 

 

 

...doesn't justify either giving you your own member group or hacking into the code an individual limit.

Unlike the "individual limit" which prevents my account from reporting messages, you mean?

 

Would giving unlimited PMs to the Members account be feasible? People have unlimited thread-based messages already, so I think it would be. You know the backend much better than I, though.

 

Hah, I had no idea that you couldn't report posts. Kudos to whoever did that though.

 

 

 

I would need to run the tool at least 26 times in order to have a working PM box. This would be very time-consuming.

But probably less time consuming than arguing about it, right?

IRONY BONUS!

 

I wish there was a button I could push to send you to hell.