Viewing Old Game's PMs

[Carebear]

Really, you are only proposing providing readily available data more easily. Today, I could write a spider to grab all messages and post them.

So, still think your idea works.

[Wethalon]

@superdipsy: The current site rules say "Screenshots of games are not allowed to be communicated in any way." This seems to still allow me to save private messages I received from another player as a pdf and post them on the forum after the game. If this is deemed unacceptable, then the site rules need to be modified, and those modification would then apply to an automatically generated pdf as well. In other words, making one's own PM history easily downloadable is a separate issue from whether posting one's own PM history should be forbidden, no?

[WHSeward]

That would not be against the site rules as written today.

I would say that if a player were to do that, it would seriously violate hobby norms. Private messages are private. If you publish someone's messages without their consent, you are acting inappropriately.

[MichaelG]

Any player that takes a screenshot and posts it would have violated a site rule and be subject to sanction for cheating.

Yes, people might cheat. If they do, there are consequences.

Does this apply to completed games too?

[super_dipsy]

Any player that takes a screenshot and posts it would have violated a site rule and be subject to sanction for cheating.

Yes, people might cheat. If they do, there are consequences.

Does this apply to completed games too?

Michael, whatever the site rules say, I think there is a little etiquette called for here, and throughout this discussion.

I think we have to start with the fact that Diplomacy is a game where there may be duplicity, lying, tactical alteration of the perceived truth etc.. If it is not in the publicly visible game, I believe players playing in a game have the right to expect private things to stay private. Supposing for example you have a standard piece of trickery to allow you to mak a stab without taking the blame - for instance the old 'I spilt my G&T over the keyboard and it must have registered a click that ruined my order'. If your explanation is made public after the game with a screenshot that shows the incoming message (hard to forge) then your private little trick is exposed. Just a simple example, but you get the picture. On that basis, when a game is finished then obviously anything that was public before in the game (eg PP) will remain public. We WILL show some things that were 'private'; in particular, we identify players who were playing anonymously, and if it is Fog we show unfogged maps. But beyond that, there should always be an element of doubt possible. This is why in a Fog game you can say to an ally that Germany has a unit in Tyrolia, but you cannot show a screenshot. The first allows for the possibility you MIGHT be lying. A forwarded message can alwasy be edited, so even if you swear it is what you received, the other player MIUGHT not believe you and the sender could strenuously deny it (and indeed forward you a copy of the 'real' message which of course they may have edited!).

Once a game is finished, I do not see the picture has changed significantly UNLESS all the players agree. So supposing you are writing an AAR and you want to enclose a screenshot of a specific message that someone sent you. Whether it is int he rules or not, I would consider it expected that you would need to get the sender's agreement first. Does that seem fair? In other words, players should use a bit of common sense and respect their opponents' privacy regarding internal game communications.

[MichaelG]

That seems reasonable.

But then, this only really applies to the issue of creating a PDF will all your messages sent/received because it could facilitate publishing someone else's messages to you. People can do that anyway; the only concern is that this makes it easier.