Shopsmith Forums

dusty wrote:I am a BAD RESPONDENT. I offer nothing to help you resolve this issue and yes, the observation is real.

I check to see if I have unread PMs every time I login. I may not read them right away but I know they are there.

If I don't open PMs on a very regular basis it will be because I either cannot get to or cannot utilize my computer. My recent times in the hospital are prime examples.

cooch366 wrote:

dusty wrote:I am a BAD RESPONDENT. I offer nothing to help you resolve this issue and yes, the observation is real.

I check to see if I have unread PMs every time I login. I may not read them right away but I know they are there.

If I don't open PMs on a very regular basis it will be because I either cannot get to or cannot utilize my computer. My recent times in the hospital are prime examples.

Yes but by you reading them, you won't see them in your outbox, and the sender will know that at least you read it.

I assume that most of us read unread threads, if a new "sent you a pm" thread existed, folks would see it as an unread thread, and maybe have a Homer Simpson moment...

JPG wrote:

cooch366 wrote:

dusty wrote:I am a BAD RESPONDENT. I offer nothing to help you resolve this issue and yes, the observation is real.

I check to see if I have unread PMs every time I login. I may not read them right away but I know they are there.

If I don't open PMs on a very regular basis it will be because I either cannot get to or cannot utilize my computer. My recent times in the hospital are prime examples.

Yes but by you reading them, you won't see them in your outbox, and the sender will know that at least you read it.

I assume that most of us read unread threads, if a new "sent you a pm" thread existed, folks would see it as an unread thread, and maybe have a Homer Simpson moment...

????????? "you" "you" "your" Replace with "you" "the sender" "their"

A message remains in the senders outbox until read by the recipient.

If it is no longer there, the sender knows it was read.

That being so, the sender knows when a message has not been read and that is when the "read yer pm' messages occur. Consider that a wake up call. If there were another place, the sender would not have a clue as to whether it was read by the recipient. i.e. I see no advantage to another place.

cooch366 wrote:
That assumes the "receiver" is AWARE that they/receiver knows they/receiver have a PM. Which is why in my original question I asked if members check on a regular basis. Because I've seen numerous threads where senders ask receivers to check their PM's

rjent wrote:

cooch366 wrote:
That assumes the "receiver" is AWARE that they/receiver knows they/receiver have a PM. Which is why in my original question I asked if members check on a regular basis. Because I've seen numerous threads where senders ask receivers to check their PM's

I kind of have to agree with JPG. LOL Whenever you are logged in, you can see whether you have an unread PM or not. It is on every page at the top. You have a "notifications" flag and a "private message" flag where you can see either a 0 (no notifications or PM's) or the number of notifications/PM's. Pretty effective. I know I wouldn't check a thread for PM's, I always just look at the top of the page each time I log in ...

JMHO

rjent wrote:
Whenever you are logged in, you can see whether you have an unread PM or not. It is on every page at the top. You have a "notifications" flag and a "private message" flag where you can see either a 0 (no notifications or PM's) or the number of notifications/PM's.

JMHO