I'm not sure why anyone would want their Profile details broadcast across the Net but I've just noticed that two of my Classmates have made entries that were showing on the What's New page, a page that can't be restricted to Classmates only. I've now gone into their Profiles and ticked their Profile Visibility button to prevent it happening again. If they notice, I'll gladly remove the restriction, but not until they do as I see my website and the often personal information that appears on it as something that should be private and for members only.

This may have been asked before but I would like to see the Profile Visibility option on a Profile either removed altogether, defaulted as if it had been ticked or moved to the Notify Me page.

It was less of a problem before when only entries made to their own Profile by someone who'd chosen not to tick the Profile Visibility button were available to anyone browsing the Net, but now that their entries also appear on the What's New page and often refer to someone else and contain personal details about that person, it brings someone else into the equation.

Mark,

I respectfully disagree with you. We have some members and guest members who have not blocked their profile from public view. As the co-administrator, I keep mine unblocked, with my phone, email address, and street address visible, so people may easily send me photos. I've had no problems in 4 1/2 years. In my opinion, the option for blocking or unblocking profiles needs to remain, with individual members deciding this matter.

In a similar vein, every page on our site is open to public viewing. I've hand typed all the captions under hundreds of photos, which has resulted in our site being readily found on internet searches. This has resulted in large number of visits from classmates in other classes, and boosted our guest membership. We consider our site an inclusive rather than exclusive site, and hope that alumni from other classes will visit and enjoy the extensive coverage of our school going back to kindergarten.

Clearly our views differ on this matter, but in my opinion, that's what Class Creator is all about, letting each class and individual determine their level of exposure to the public.

I respect your opinion, Scott but as you say, mine differs from it. I'm pleased for you that other classes are swelling your own class's guest membership and if that's been helped by opening all your pages for public viewing then you're obviously achieving one of your aims.

My site and needs are a little different to yours as it is a multi-class site (or multi-year as we'd call it in the UK) with around 380 members and guest membership is limited to anyone who was not a pupil or teacher but whom I believe to have a close enough school connection to warrant it. The school closed over 40 years ago so interest in it is going to be primarily limited to existing members and ex-pupils and teachers who are still alive, and that's the way I want to keep it.

I'm not sure I see the argument that CC is all about allowing individuals to determine their own level of public exposure. For me it's more about re-uniting a community that still has a connection to its common past and not a vehicle for airing thoughts and information to the general public, especially when those thoughts and that information relate to someone else. Individuals can do that to their heart's content on website's they themselves have created and the responsibility for and consequences of doing so will be theirs but it's not what I want for the one I created and administer alone.

Only five of my members had actually left their Profile Visibility button unchecked and having spoken to them all, they've all said it was a mistake on their part. I'm not going to prevent any of my members from leaving it unchecked but it might make them think more about the consequences of doing it if the option is moved to the Notify Me page. They can make information that relates to themselves and their own family as public as they like but when they refer on their own publicly visible Profile to other people or something that might be personal to those people and do so without the other person's knowledge, then I don't believe that's permissable.

In the event that CC agree with your view of things, I'll just have to make it even clearer to my members who don't want to check the Profile Visibility button that they should be extra careful about what they put on their Profile, especially where it affects the privacy of others.

My apologies, Scott, if this comes across as a little pompous. It's just that it's something I feel strongly about as I want to do right by those members of my website who may never be aware that there's a possibility their name and personal information could be being broadcast.

It's a difficult one and one I think I'm unlikely to get my own way on. I thought I'd make my point anyway.

I'm with Scott on this one...everyone can control their own visibility. I have a multi-yr site with over 500 out of over 2000 alumni joined.
They are all adults..and can make the decision if they want their info spread all over the net. They have that option with CC.

Here in the states it's called freedom of speech. Sounds to me like you are trying to restrict their freedom to speak.
I think CC will restrict some things..because it grabs comments out of context..and no one understands what they are talking about...it's open and public..just put a disclaimer on your homepage that everything they comment about on anyone's profile could end up on the what's new page...tell them if they want their conversations private to use the private message link under their photo.
I think just a little guidance is all that's needed. We are going to add this to our Privacy Policy at the bottom of our homepage.

Mark,

No worries about coming across as pompous! These forums are really nice places to exchange views.

Certainly, the profile visibility issue is important and it seems you have taken the appropriate steps for your multi-year site. I'm happy you contacted those members who had their profiles unblocked before you switched them to blocked.

Leaving aside the profile visibility issue for the moment, one of the reasons we leave our custom pages unblocked is only three classes in our school have websites. We have chosen to add a lot of school history and photos that go way beyond the years we attended, so having that available to the 10,000+ who have attended the school since it opened is helpful --- it literally appears no where else on the web.

We also list the status of all our faculty, many of whom taught well before and after our class, providing another point of interest for alumni,and actively solicit over 200 "former classmates" as members, who were in our class between kindergarten and twelfth grade but did not graduate with us. Allowing them to see the site pages before they join has been extremely helpful. We limit membership to those who have a close relationship to our class, and have not had any undue requests for guest membership.

Darlene,

I think it's called freedom of speech wherever you are and this country has always respected everyone's right to it and I'm one of those who who would never question it. Unless, that is, it causes hurt to another, knowingly or unknowingly. It's those people I'm trying to protect and, as I said, if all it takes is me making it clear what's expected of everyone, then I'm confident my wishes will be given due consideration by the vast majority as they're all old enough to know what's right and what isn't and I think I know them pretty well. But it only takes one maverick and ............

I've already mailed all members to tell them about what happens to their comments but, you're right, I should really have reminded them about the private message option.

I'll simply do my best to keep an eye on things just in case.

My eyes grow weary. Time for bed. Thanks, both of you.

Hm. The way I look at the settings on members' profiles (as well as the Notify Me options) is...

When something new is added, the setting should not be automatic to share (a yes choice). The settings are part of the initial set-up of a profile (registration) and we need to give them the option to 'turn it on' not off.

To me, this shows we are serious about our members' privacy... the same as CC hid contact info. If someone posts about grandchildren and a discussion continues with location information, that is a privacy issue. I'm fairly certain the position of admins was never to be comment police.

So now because this is the way I see it, I need to go into each member's profile to click the option OFF.... over 800 members? Really?

Again, this is my PERSONAL thoughts and choices.

Did something change? I know my group chose to keep their info private, and that's the way we've been operating for about 6 years now. I looked at a few when I read Gwen's comment, and they still are marked private - but I don't want to have to check all of them. I'm a bit confused as to what prompted this concern. Is this more Facebook related with the What's New? We aren't using Facebook and won't go that route.
Thanks all.
Diana

Diana - I have added the profile privacy override to your site. This removes the option for members to choose.

Thanks. That will be great for us. But I still don't understand what prompted all the concern. Did you make everybody's profile visible just recently?

No, there has not been any change in that regard.