I love how 99% of the topics in Meta are treated by some users as opportunities to bitch about something a user they don't like did in the trust system at some point in the past. [/sarcasm]
Can you not just answer the damn questions and leave the sniping for the Reputation boards?
Please no derailing off topic whimpering with vague irrelvant conjecture.
I see only admin and prior admin " opinions" on "leaking" private messages and the validity of those opinions being debated.
" bitching about things they didn't like in the past"
is it correctly translated as
" scamming and double standards of my friends must not be mentioned even if they are clearly relevant and on topic"
There is the prior admin lauda, who is coming to explain the massive changes that subsequently took place that required him to 180 on " leaking " PMs, that is going to be very interesting. Hurry Please lauda. I look forward to this.
Can you Doomad be more useful to this debate by telling your friend lauda to return with his explanation. So far we have
Theymos = it is wrong
SaltySpitoon = it is wrong
Flying hellfish = it is wrong
Lauda = it is wrong to leak private messages if it reveals I am telling people to remove their friends against their will because they are intimidated by me and my toadies. I would never do it to others.
to
Lauda = it is correct to leak other members PMs if it suits me,and I will cry if I get measures by my own standards.
It would be nice to see all admin and prior admin are on the same page. Some may believe it is not essential to pay any attention to a prior admin that was disgraced and was removed due to being strongly implicated in an extortion and has been proven a scammer who red tags his whistleblowers. I have sympathy for those with those views but why not give lauda the opportunity to demonstrate their was a massive change that required a full 180 on his opinion of "leaking" PMs and not just more double standards and manipulation.
I am hoping for the best. Lauda don't let us down.