I don’t see a distraction here. I understand this: There is already so much data stored in private messages that we really don’t need to instigate more storage, of postcards’ backsides exchanged for translation (varn’s suggestion).
1 Like
It doesn’t matter who brought in the problem, you said it isn’t another problem, I pointed why it is.
Yes, data storage can be discussed. Maybe you will open another topic to that?
Also, if you see faults in one solution, it doesn’t mean we should forget the original problem and only discuss the faults of a solution. (This is how I see it. Again sees as an attempt to distract from the original problem.)
1 Like
I really hoped to get a real response instead of a mere confirmation of receipt…
2 Likes
No, I won’t, because I’ve just stated a counter-argument to @varn’s suggestion. I really wonder why you dismiss it as “another problem”. It’s a problem tightly knotted to his suggestion, and if he wants to stick with it, he should try to find a convincing answer why storing data longer than necessary is preferable.
1 Like
I think data storage merits another thread for discussion. But to compare the two, I think we can compare the risk, the average exposure time. I don’t know exactly how likely an image stored on the server would be leaked but should be very unlikely. The period of time for a postcard is published on the forum is a certainty.
1 Like
My concern is not only about storage time (which btw the mods can control in a topic but not in private messages), but about the fact that your suggestion will lead to uncontrolled, unnecessary data storing. I have a right that my data isn’t stored in unknown places for infinite time.
This was the second part of my concern : you can’t just dismiss the risk that people treat the shared data in irresponsible ways, like sharing it further, even if the purpose (translation) is already fulfilled and the data should be deleted. Directing people to exchanging data in private messages would be irresponsible in my opinion.
1 Like
It’s a genuine concern. It can be demonstrated in a similar way.
For the act of storing that you’ve brought up,
Status quo
- What is happening outside of the translation thread?
- Many stored images
Blanket ban
- What will happen if all the intended postcard backsides are permanently stored elsewhere?
- Still many images as it looks like adding only a limited number to infinity.
It’s relevant but private storage is not the intended scope of discussion here. You may open a new thread and discuss how it can be protected or achieved.
1 Like
No.
As far as I understand, the “Counter-argument/solution/distraction" is:
What should we do with the poisoned apples in our store? Well, if we put them in another store, they’re not our problem anymore, right?
You can’t separate both problems, because they are linked.
2 Likes
Ok, I’m giving up here. 
I’ve understood that you don’t want to hear concerns affecting your suggestion, nor are you able or willing to deal with them in an appropriate way. It’s much easier to declare them to be a separate problem. Your case building goes very convenient that way.
3 Likes
No.
I see more like “it’s safe to eat here, no poisoned fruits”
(Let’s just not tell the apples can be poisonous because there are not many.)
If someone points out the poisonous apples, it’s distracted to other fruits (facebook, ig), how facebook is not safe, and we should care about that.
If apples are removed (not forced to put to another restaurant (edit. and if they were put to another restaurant, they will know a poisonous apple is handled), no one has to eat them.
But solutions are like let’s not remove them, because someone might eat them from the bin.
And then is distracted wanting to discuss how bins should be kept safe that no one eats from there.
2 Likes
It is the same logic. Bad things happen in the world, but it doesn’t mean because bad things happen in the world, we should invite the same problem into our backyard. The two quantities – the number of postcards in the translation thread and the number of postcards in the world – are like a few versus infinity. I think we should instead try to keep our backyard clean (so should all the others, but we don’t have control).
Back to my OP, the merit that I see in my proposal is the trade-off between efficiency and fairness. I understand the measure upsets some people, but for those who are expected to bear the inconvenience in the scenario, I urge them to think about the people who may be upset by the temporary yet public posting of their postcard writings.
2 Likes
I wasn’t talking about the other fruits (Facebook,…), I was talking about the same fruit (Postcrossing site) in another store (direct messages).
This is the thing varn is suggesting (sending the pictures via direct message, not supervised by admins, without control of the resulting data) instead of the thread where the data is deleted.
2 Likes
It is a genuine concern that is better addressed in a new topic. Private storage is not the focus of the thread because if we insert this element into the argument and look at it from both sides, we’ll find out it doesn’t change the argument. Postcrossing private messages plus private messages outside of Postcrossing basically equals infinity, so once again:
If you want to focus on the stored images on Postcrossing only, then the same logic still applies. Here I assume there is already a great amount of personal information stored here (addresses, photos, etc.). An even more reasonable assumption is that a leak is way less likely than an exposure (which is already a certainty).
Oh, so now the Postcrossing forum is the outside world, too?
The direct messages are part of the forum!
1 Like
To clarify, I was comparing the two quantities. Edited as follows:
Glad you raised this concern. I thought about this too. Again, this concern merits another topic. And I would love to see what people think, for example, if they want an auto-delete feature.
To put it in the context of the proposed measure, let me use the same format. In terms of private messages,
Status quo
- What is happening outside of the translation thread?
- Many private messages
Blanket ban
- What will happen if all the intended postcard backsides are permanently stored in Postcrossing private messages?
- Still many as it looks like adding only a limited number to infinity.
So it does seem that we can address the two issues (public posting and data storage) one by one. It can of course be the reverse order. For example, whether or not an auto-delete feature is introduced to private messages here, the problem in the OP remains pretty much the same.
1 Like
Ok. (I leave the fruits now, I think we understand.)
Published messages (translation thread) has same problems as private messages, plus public ones has the problem of people taking screenshots of it, and the image being stored in that persons phone too, plus and it being publicly visible also to people not in postcrossing, without the sender knowing about it. The fact that it is deleted, doesn’t mean it never was there.
Private messages are direct communication. When I have been asked for a translation, it has been about this way: “Hey I received this “id-number”, unfortunately I don’t know enough Finnish, could you help me translate it. I can take a photo if you don’ remember what you wrote.”
If one of the solutions include a problem that exists even before using it as a solution to this problem, doesn’t mean we should forget the problem the situation now has.
1 Like
Guess it’s time to invite the sender to join the forum for exchanging photos. Then it circles back to the nature of forum being optional. And further back to the issue of fairness and what the core concept of Postcrossing is.
If it imposes too much of a burden on the sender, then let go. When we don’t have permission to publish, then it’s prudent not to. At least this respects the sender’s presumed privacy/will.
1 Like
Yes, this is why I see it can be treated as different problem.
If the auto-delete is taken to private messages, I’m still not informed about my message possibly being published in the translate thread.
@Cassisia do you understand now how I see it’s a different problem?
1 Like
Now I need to correct myself, I didn’t find any of this in my private messages, they have been in Hurray messages. Sorry about confusion!
1 Like