Add more private messages??

[walter23]

How hard would it be to let us keep a few more PM's kicking around? I'm always fighting to keep my inbox / outbox clear enough to use.

Is storage that tight 'round here?

[Ash]

I prefer it being set as it is... otherwise I have too many old messages.

Just select the "save all as..." thing at the bottom, I save as a text file and back up to my computer.

[Toyon]

I would love extra storage on the pm's.

[vinny]

I'd love to get more storage.
PM sent.

[Kirk Gittings]

I put the question to all the moderators. This is beyond my expertise. I'll let you know when I hear back.

[Kirk Gittings]

According to Tom Westbrook our IT tech guru. It would be possible to double the amount of private messages stored, but we would probably have to reduce the max size of PM's from 5,000 characters to 3,000 to compensate (most PMs are a lot shorter current overall average is about 780 chars per PM). Thoughts? I know all my PMs are pretty short.

[D. Bryant]

According to Tom Westbrook our IT tech guru. It would be possible to double the amount of emails stored, but we would probably have to reduce the max size of PM's from 5,000 characters to 3,000 to compensate (most PMs are a lot shorter current overall average is about 780 chars per PM). Thoughts? I know all my PMs are pretty short.

Go for it!

Don Bryant

[BarryS]

That would be great. I doubt I've ever had a PM that was over 3000 characters, but my mailbox seems to fill up pretty fast on a regular basis.

[Jeremy Moore]

The few people that write such lengthy PMs could just write two now and they would still have the same number left as before (and get an extra 1,000 characters!). Win-Win. I say go for it.

[walter23]

Sounds like a good idea. However - I've never noticed the "save all" thing before - now all those bits of info I've accumulated and saved can be removed and space cleared up. Woo.

[Ole Tjugen]

My PM box is chronically congested. Partly because I'm spoilt rotten by the practically unlimited capacity I have as a moderator over at that other forum, partly because there are lots of older messages I like to be able to get hold of wherever I am. Since I use three different PC's at home and a different PC every time I'm at work (and even now I'm off shift and use a second work PC), the PM box is the most practical place for me to keep them.

I would love more PM space - at least until the new improved model is full, too... :)

[John Bowen]

can we reduce it to 1500 characters and quadruple the # of messages?

[Struan Gray]

Send only smileys: you could have 500 000 each :-)

[Tom Westbrook]

I made the change: 100 messages max, 3,000 characters max length.

[David A. Goldfarb]

Thanks, that's an improvement.

[ASRafferty]

Worth remembering that it's the quotes of the previous PMs in an exchange that boosts the size of the next PM you want to send; 3-4 back and forths, and you'll be approaching the message size limit. If you don't have to quote the previous when you're ready to send the next, you won't be annoyed by stops for exceeding message size.

[BarryS]

Thank you Kirk and Tom!

[Kirk Gittings]

Good point Amy.

That was a great idea Walter.

[Brian Ellis]

I don't know anything about the technology involved and whether this is even relevant to PM capacity but how about cutting down on all the "Show Yer . . . . " stuff threads and increasing the private message capacity? It's hard to believe that anyone really cares about looking at 500 or more images of trees or water or whatever.

By "cutting down" I don't mean eliminating, I just mean limiting the total number of images per-"Show Yer . . . " thread to something more manageable and meaningful, like 100 or so. Of course it may be that there's no connection between PM capacity and volume or size of threads, in which case this is irrelevant.

[GPS]

I don't know anything about the technology involved and whether this is even relevant to PM capacity but how about cutting down on all the "Show Yer . . . . " stuff threads and increasing the private message capacity? It's hard to believe that anyone really cares about looking at 500 or more images of trees or water or whatever.

...

It is perhaps hard to believe (and I don't view those threads at all...) but have you noticed that exactly these threads get the highest number of "views"? Unbelievable as it is... :)

[Brian Ellis]

It is perhaps hard to believe (and I don't view those threads at all...) but have you noticed that exactly these threads get the highest number of "views"? Unbelievable as it is... :)

Yes, I noticed. I figured it was everyone looking at their own photos. : - )