[1eyedjack]

doofik, on Sep 8 2004, 09:04 AM, said:

Pozeracz:-)

Your analogy is so descriptive Bravo

Jola

Actually it is not that great an analogy.

With a spy-chip in the brain you would have two concerns
1) a lack of control to limit the information that passes from the brain to the chip
and
2) a lack of control to disable the chip.

Those would be justifiable concerns. I would greatly fear a spy-chip in the brain for these reasons and, were they analogous to my proposal for BBO then I would sympathise.

In fact neither control is lacking in my proposal.

Back to the drawing board.

[spwdo]

Hi,

I thought BBO was logging chat already, i had once a discussion about booting someone from a tourney where yellow of bbo copied and paste the exact chat /conversation i had with that person. It was in an ongoing tourney so , minutes after the booting took place, he told me he looked the chat up so i m confused from this poll.

Can also remember someone telling me if u coud give exact time chat occurred it coud be looked up.

[luke warm]

monocled one: i'd be against private chat being logged for any reason... all you will accomplish is drive people to use messenger, yahoo, icq, trillian, etc

paul: it isn't about fear of or trust in the bbo management, the same as i (presently) don't fear and do trust the fbi... that's a non sequitur imo

i haven't changed my mind about this, but it seems that uday feels there is a necessity for some action here... so given that there will be action, his suggestion sounds the most fair... i don't believe, as someone suggested, that permission from both parties should be a prerequisite for an encrypted log being open... why would i, if i whispered sweet nothings to doofster and she got peeved about it, give my permission? neither do i think it would work for me to have my own encryption key, for the same reason...

i guess, since something is gonna be done, maybe a firm set of rules or criteria needs to be set by uday that must be met before he opens a log

[1eyedjack]

luke warm, on Sep 8 2004, 06:07 PM, said:

monocled one: i'd be against private chat being logged for any reason... all you will accomplish is drive people to use messenger, yahoo, icq, trillian, etc

I have no objection to that. Indeed I would encourage it.

A player might want secure private communication for one of three reasons:

a) to be unethical or cheat. This requires a conspirator. You might as well ignore this class of person for the purpose of this discussion. Objecting to the proposal simply because it does nothing to solve a problem that it is not designed to solve is a wasted objection.

b) to be abusive. This requires some cooperation by the recipient of the abuse, if it is to be transmitted by some means outside of the BBO interface. If you want to be privately rude to someone via ICQ it is not much use if the recipient will only accept communication through BBO.

c) for benign purposes. I see no harm in private chat for benign purposes being transmitted through ICQ or whatever.

Indeed, this development would enhance the BBO experience of ethical and benign players. So-called "private" chat to opponents in the course of a tournament that is transmitted through BBO could then be made freely and instantaneously available to TDs (and indeed to kibbitzers, to enhance their kibbitzing experience), without players being concerned that the opportunity for entirely private chat (via ICQ etc) is denied them.

[rona_]

Marc, are you sure it was private chat? Maybe they log private chat in tournaments? I thought this whole thread was about getting views on whether to log private chat or not, so I have to assume there must be a misunderstanding somewhere.

[uday]

bbo currently logs some forms of public chat (MBC tables, Tourney tables, and that is all, i think).

We do not log chat I consider private, such as person->person chat, or ( IIRC) chat at a table in a private club or chat in a chatroom.

This has handicapped us when it comes to dealing with abuse. Abuse is a big issue here for many reasons and a prevalent form of abuse . To get rid of the nastier element of our society, we have to be able to look at chatlogs.

When the offence involves private chat, we currently ask for screenshots, or chat logs.
Many of us can't be bothered, or don't know how to do this.

So, many offences undoubtedly go unreported because the process of reporting abuse is needlessly difficult.

I would like to log private chat (for a day or so) for later retrieval in a manner that protects it from casual scrutiny by the sysadmin ( uday ) and that allows a user to decide when to release his own private chat to abuse@ , presumably as part of a complaint about someone else.

It is true that I have the power, if not the will, to log all private chat now, and all you have is my assurance that this is not happening now.

Unfortunately, the notion of logging private chat raises some people hackles.

I'm still leaning towards logging private chat, encrypted with the users password, then supplying a screen which the user can use when reporting to abuse@

Yellows (with one exception: U) won't have the ability to look at this log.

[doofik]

Well, here's my problem with this whole thing. Some comments exchanged between me and my friends are not fit for anyone else's eyes, neither for language nor for content. I'm a fiery sort, when provoked, given to some, how shall I term it, unlady-like comments. Would I want you to read them? Hell no

Jola

[uday]

Jola,

so don't send them to abuse@ and no one will read them

[doofik]

Uday,

After your last comment I feel like Gilda Radner's "nevermind" mode. What am I missing here? Isn't your position that you'd have the ability to read all chat (if so inclined) even the private stuff?

Enlighten me please

Jola

[uday]

For the last time

only YOU will get to decide whether to forward YOUR private chat to abuse@ or not. If YOU do not forward it, no one (*) will be able to read it.

Make sense ? If you do not CHOOSE to forward your chat to abuse@, nothing is different, and no one(*) will be able to get read it.


(*) = Since all chat passes through my servers, you are not protected from me. You have never had this protection, beyond my assurances and disinclination. Logging the encrypted chat changes nothing.

[sceptic]

Personally, I would not like to see private chat logged, *edited the rest, Rain*



I would hate to see that start in here, I realise that you have an excellent censorship policy here and it seems to work.

DO NOT log private chat, if you dont want to talk to someone because they are rude to you, black list them and click ignore enemies, that works perfectly.

As for resolving abuse issues, then they do it once and then they are on ignore. problem solved. if to many people report them then may be just log that individuals private chat and inform them that you are doing so

[scoob]

uday, on Sep 9 2004, 08:22 AM, said:

bbo currently logs some forms of public chat (MBC tables, Tourney tables, and that is all, i think).

We do not log chat I consider private, such as person->person chat, or ( IIRC) chat at a table in a private club or chat in a chatroom.

This has handicapped us when it comes to dealing with abuse. Abuse is a big issue here for many reasons and a prevalent form of abuse . To get rid of the nastier element of our society, we have to be able to look at chatlogs.

When the offence involves private chat, we currently ask for screenshots, or chat logs.
Many of us can't be bothered, or don't know how to do this.

So, many offences undoubtedly go unreported because the process of reporting abuse is needlessly difficult.

I would like to log private chat (for a day or so) for later retrieval in a manner that protects it from casual scrutiny by the sysadmin ( uday ) and that allows a user to decide when to release his own private chat to abuse@ , presumably as part of a complaint about someone else.

It is true that I have the power, if not the will, to log all private chat now, and all you have is my assurance that this is not happening now.

Unfortunately, the notion of logging private chat raises some people hackles.

I'm still leaning towards logging private chat, encrypted with the users password, then supplying a screen which the user can use when reporting to abuse@

Yellows (with one exception: U) won't have the ability to look at this log.

this sounds like an alternative perfectly acceptable to people on both sides of this argument.

[epeeist]

sceptic, on Sep 9 2004, 01:29 PM, said:

....
DO NOT log private chat, if you dont want to talk to someone because they are rude to you, black list them and click ignore enemies, that works perfectly.
....

[excerpt only quoted]

I used to have ignore enemies selected. However, when I was in a tournament where an "enemy" was opponent, I didn't understand why I was getting no answer to my question about the meaning of a bid...

Similarly, if I recall correctly I've once or twice had an "enemy" as a partner in an individual tournament. Makes no sense to ignore chat (sayc p? 2/1? why won't you answer?! ).

I think Uday's proposed system, logging even private chat for a day or so, retrievable if necessary but otherwise deleted, is very reasonable. I had occasion, unfortunately, to make a report for the first time this evening and it was a pain to copy multiple screenshots to the clipboard, paste into a document, e-mail it to abuse, etc.

Thus, with Uday's proposal, the ONLY situation in which anyone other than the recipient would see private chat is if either you or they reported abuse. And if they reported abuse, then they could (by more tedious means) send exactly the same private chat as would be accessed under this system.

The only problem is if you don't trust BBO. And if you don't trust BBO, why are you sending chat they could access?

[peefco]

Uday, can you send me all private chats my wife have had with other guys then me ? I'll apreciate that.
peefco