infraction because post limit character minimum too low

Discussion in 'Support & Feedback' started by amarventris, Oct 27, 2009.

  1. #1
    http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=1549145#post12776039

    i got an infraction because "Pm sent" was too small a character limit and my message pointing this out was termed

    "Inappropriate / Disallowed Post".

    Since "pm sent" is a COMMON response to posted threads for services ASKING for PM's as responses, why is the post limit set so low for this function?

    How can it be helpful to get so much negative feedback from a site that supposedly benefits from a community driven interaction dynamic?
     
    amarventris, Oct 27, 2009 IP
  2. digitalpoint

    digitalpoint Overlord of no one Staff

    Messages:
    38,334
    Likes Received:
    2,613
    Best Answers:
    462
    Trophy Points:
    710
    Digital Goods:
    29
    #2
    digitalpoint, Oct 27, 2009 IP
  3. bluebelt91

    bluebelt91 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    879
    Likes Received:
    9
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    130
    #3


    As I Quoting the forum rules mentioned by Shawn you should not send reply like PM sent as it is obvious as whenever any member login or refresh his/her windows , a popup will be displayed as new PM received. Agreeing with forum rules, reply like "PM sent" is a simply wastage of resources.As this community is huge and lot of members sending response like these will add extra burden to DP.so avoid posting such response which are of no meaning or very short.
    As rightly said use email instead. :)
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2009
    bluebelt91, Oct 27, 2009 IP
  4. Dollar hunter

    Dollar hunter Member

    Messages:
    500
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    #4
    As u got the infraction coz u were out of the rules as posted by shawn....it ll be like ur post has no value.he ll know automatically when he ll recieve the PM....read the rules carefully .
     
    Dollar hunter, Oct 29, 2009 IP