Probably fine, less words is better, the expectation that nobody in the world could ever discover your super-secret highly encrypted spy communications is not doing anyone any favors…
Technically Twitter uses the words “Direct Message” which still might be preferable.
Using “Message” or “Direct Message” seems fine. It doesn’t infer that the communication is private. “Message Individual” however is not appealing (aesthetically speaking) nor is the term used anywhere else. There’s no reason to be distinct in this regard.
As far as presenting a warning, other form of prompt, or heaven forbid a modal, no. It would simply add to the visual clutter. Having too many warnings or other eye distractions not only muddies the minimalist design but also conditions the end-user to ignore text as there simply is more and more of it.
This made me laugh.
Seriously though, unless you actually spend time encrypting your messages and send them through some privately set up channels, none of your private messages are private. They can be read by the government, spy agencies, hackers, utilized by data aggregators and so on.
In fact I would say the only truly private way of communicating is telepathy, if that is possible that is.
Coming from vB I’m used to using “PM”.
The first time I saw “DM” it took me a short while to realize it was an equivalent of “PM” and that the D stood for Direct, But not all that long of a while.
Personally I’d be fine with either “Message” or “Direct Message”, but then again I have no trouble with PM either.
I agree that “Individual” is not needed as it is implied.
Agreed. “Message Individual” was simply the first thing I thought of, and was more of an example… I like Direct Message far better, it has a use case, and design precedence through twitter, instagram, and #slack.
I whole heartily agree with this sentiment in principle, and practice. I am simply trying to offer a solution for a perceived issue. The issue being “How to address privacy and administrative concerns”, in a minimal and thoughtful manner. I want to iterate that there is reason to be had by incorporating some UI elements for this. It would preferably serve multiple functions, add value, and drive process.
I guess the notion that I diverge on is that it is inherent and/or implied, and that this alone is cause to not incorporate some way of addressing the perception. Changing the verbage is one way of changing that perception, and may ultimately be enough, but I digress in that I believe it might take a bit more in addressing this perceived issue.
Clicking @user in post preview goes to new page, loses composed message
Thinking about it, I really like the term dm, but feel it does not fit right. Messages are meant for groups of people sometimes, direct feels a bit like its one-on-one thing
My two cents:
I like the word “direct” because it implies choice, not only one-to-one, but one-to-many. “I’m directing this message to a set individual or group” it carries more purpose. Where as message alone is somewhat more ambiguous. It has more connotations for inference. Sending a “broadcast message”. “Sending a message” has ambiguity for non-verbal cues. Ambiguity with “Message Board” as well…
While it’s not Super Duper Secret - I think Private Message works. It’s also terminology people are familiar with in the context of a forum.
You can be involved in a conversation with one or more people on a forum two ways - in public or in private. Private Message covers that.
Direct doesn’t work so well because you could direct a message to one or people in a public topic too.
“Personal Message”, so we can keep the abbreviation. Or does that still suggest privacy?
I agree with @loopback0 here. this sounds like change for the sake of change to me.
we’re talking about a forum context and in a forum context the term
private message is well understood.
if we have someone that is misconstruing that term to mean “super duper secret encrypted no one but me can read” then i would say we have an issue with a single user and not an issue with the terminology that everyone else seems to be A-OK with.
Still, less words is better. And words have power, if someone is reading that and thinking “oh, this is totally 100% private” then the word is causing missed expectations.
I think Direct Message (DM) is the clearest and simplest way to call this. Plus it is already known and used on various social media sites. What is it about DM that you don’t think quite fits @sam?
I disagree with this sentiment as a blanket rule. Clear and concise language should be the rule. Often, that does equate to fewer words, but not always.
Honestly, I don’t think it really matters all too much whether it ends up just message, or direct message, it becomes an argument of nuances, and preference of language. I would lean toward “direct message” for clarity. However, in the current design, with the location and proximity of the message-the-user action, to the rest of the user profile information, there wouldn’t be any real confusion as to what that action was meant to do.
I would however drop any connotation to privacy. Make it absolutely clear, if not explicit, that there is none, and there shouldn’t be any implication there would be.
OK, I changed all instances of “Private Message” to just “Message”. I think this better captures the intention of the feature, it is not meant to be a hard-core privacy feature!
FWIW looking on meta, there are still some inconsistencies in the naming throughout the app. I won’t be able to give further feedback from our local system though because I think we are going to be forced to disable the M’s without basic auditing of admin access.
I like this change alot but it will take some steps to rollout the change and let everyone know and get used to it.
I noticed the new user welcome message has [PM] appended at the end. Presumably this will be changed on other new instances but existing instances will have to change that somewhere.
You don’t have access to basic Apache / Nginx server logs? And remember there are read flags and read times in the database for all users. So you do have logs, if you want them.
@tobiaseigen As for [PM] I think I made it [Msg] but perhaps [M] is even better and shorter.
[M] is moderator
[Msg] is definitely perferred over [M].
[M] Could mean anything to someone unfamiliar. It may as well not even be mentioned.