As a society we have decided what within reason entails. As an example: saying "I'm going to kill you" has been deemed an inappropriate comment and therefore illegal, even though freedom of speech says you can say whatever you want. That's where within reason comes in.

And yes, when websites do require this. I do think about it and it does bother me.

I don't understand how my opinion of how it affects our first amendment right is overly complicated. I dont know how to further simplify: say what you want, don't say what you don't.

Your comments have become very nit picky, pulling bits and pieces out of here and there to criticize instead of looking at the broader picture of the post.

I would like to hear why you think it would be appropriate for a website to force its users to write a message.

A web site can make their own rules, and if the people who partake don't agree, they can go elsewhere. It's their site and their rules. MFP made rules about not posting pro ana stuff and not bashing moderators, and that is their right on their web site. So, MFP is, in effect, limiting freedom of speech already, and you don't have a problem with that (and neither do I!!! I think rules are here so people are not offended and play nicely) So, if MFP wants to have users include a message when they request a friendship, they are more than entitled to do that.

This is really all I care to say on the matter - I think requiring a message would be great, and I think having that be option is even better.

Well this is an interesting post. I'll respond to each of your points/questions:

1. Saying, "I'm going to kill you," is not in itself illegal. Otherwise I'm pretty sure we'd all have been booked into central processing and taken to county jail many times in our lives. It is, however, illegal to make threats such as, "you better watch your back, because when you least expect it I'm going to show up and you'll be sorry." This is considered a threat. In certain places, of course, it may be inappropriate to say, "I'm going to kill you." But not in and of itself illegal.

2. If it irks you, don't join that website. Remember, their freedom of speech also means that they can ask for communication as they deem appropriate for their site.

3. It is not overly complicated- it just straight up makes no sense and and has no context in this situation. I can't make it much simpler than: if MFP decides to make it OPTIONAL to require a message and some people decide that they, individually, require that they receive a message with a friend request, YOUR rights are not infringed upon. If you resent having to include a message, don't befriend those people. That is not MFP's fault. That is the user's decision at that point. This is all entirely hypothetical, of course, as this was a suggestion in "Website Suggestions/Feedback" and no moderator has made any comment in favor of or against the suggestion.

4. I'm not nit-picking you nor do I wish to only criticize you. You're making really odd claims with no backing or sense behind them...just wanting to understand, since you're implying that someone is trying to impede your first amendment rights. Just makes no sense.

5. I haven't once said it's inappropriate or appropriate for a website to force its users to do anything (although that is their right. Just as it's your right to not participate in sites that ask you to do things that you're uncomfortable with). I'm all for the idea of the optional box.

1. Directly saying to someone "I'm going to kill you" is a threat and illegal.

2. I agree, every day we make various decisions that may impede our rights. When we agree to those ToS we are allowing that. I'm simply saying that I don't think it is a good idea to make it forced upon all users

3. As I have stated multiple times I have ONLY been against making it MANDATORY for EVERYONE to send a friend request with a message ANYONE.

I have even stated myself that I too find it annoying when people send blank friend requests.

So if you're saying it's a bad idea to force it on all users, but everyone else seems to be happy with the idea of an option for this rather than a mandate, why are you still asserting your point?

All I have been doing is defending my opinion on a hypothetical situation that I felt would infringe upon my first amendment rights. I'm all for having the option as I have said in other posts.

Hmmm...ok.

It was unnecessary, in that case, for you to comment, wasn't it?

But anyway. Have a great night!

Your comment makes you sound like you are new to the concept of arguing, however every comment you have made on this thread has been to evoke some sort of action out of some user. I was simply just doing that=p

I don't think requiring a message will make it any easier to screen. The whole "message required" thing is silly.

thank you=)

go figure...

I want to send you a blank friend request just for that comment=)=p

how would "sending a message when requesting a friend" infringe on your rights? Just wondering... don't necessarily agree or disagree, just not sure I see your point here.

Just you, actually!

wow this has gotten to be wild here lol

well if anyone want to add feel free i need a lot as my journey has miles and pounds to go

At least it would be a NEW topic...at least for the first month...LOL

I think you've earned a cookie!

you're 100% correct, and that is the way it currently is, if you don't like it, go to another website, however,asking for them to switch forum software or purchase an upgrade for something so trival is just ridiculous, unless you have run a forum or code, you can't just "turn on" an option that isn't there, or spend months coding one from scratch.


I think if this is your biggest complaint about MPF, they are doing great ..

Do you require a message with that friend request or is a blank request ok?

Isn't it already an option to send a note with a request?
I generally say some pointless blah blah if I send a request but don't mind a blank request sent my way. Most of the people on my list have sent blank requests and not one of them has turned out to be any less a decent friend than those who sent a note.

Hey, ivanovnichola, if you use the "quote" feature, your posts will make much more sense.

ahh- a voice of reason!
And who's to say just because they DO send a message that they WILL be a friend of value? We take our chances with each "add" that we grant, whether there is a message that accompanies the request or not. We all just have to do our own due diligence and determine if being friends with that person is worth or time/effort or not.

What was the point of this comment then?

Frankly I just don't care. I guess I assume we are all here for the same reason, weight loss and support, and that's the reason your asking for a friend request. I assume that if you end up with a stalker you can unfriend and report them if need be. I've never ever thought of not accepting someone based on no message when wanting to be friends.

I do usually... I just wasn't expecting someone to comment so quickly.