I would vote against, it is not worth losing the no PM's in game

Why would you want to vote against this one?

Is it possible to vote against this one ?

This feature will make communicating with tournament opponents or regular team mates much easier.

I hope message appears to player immediately in a pop up rather than sitting in their inbox waiting to be opened.

voted for this one, "able to see, whos online" and "add a "friends list" subset the invites list"

a friends list, where u can chat with players and invite them to games would be awesome!

I'd love to vote for this if I had some votes left, will check back when I receive more, whenever that is.

Pretty much exactly what Perrin said. Disabling in game PM's already has no real purpose, as there are ways around it. If people really feel that strongly about it, I guess you could make that game option also disable global PM's as long as the game is active. But that seems like overkill to me. To me, global PM is one of the most blatantly needed features for Warlight right now, and losing the ability to lock down in-game PM's doesn't even remotely affect my decision.

Personally, i don't strategize about a game outside of a game... I will talk to someone unrelated about it in a seperate game.. I often go to a 1v1 with crafty and talk about games i am in or are in, but nothing of any real essence, and never to make treaties... in fact, i think we've only made 1 treaty the entire time we've played together and it was in a pm in that match. No Pm's should remain in indy games imho. to force people to use globals to bypass, or use general chat if they decide to remain honorable, either way i think this feature would be of tremendous help to the site

And of course i agree that what pink talks about would be considered cheating.

I'm willing to cut deals in the public chat room. I just imagine were all playing the game in the same room if PM is off. If PM is on, I imagine that private meetings and deals are encouraged as part of game strategy. Frankly, all the complaining about collusion is really silly. I think a wholly anonymous game would be a nice option (see Troll's feature suggestion), i.e. no chat or PM at all and fogged out player identities, but if a chat/PM is there, trying to say some things are OK to say in chat and other things are not okay is like writing special rules that don't exist.

i also don't like the idea of getting rid of no PM.

I like the concept but don't love the idea of getting rid of no PM option as I find a lot of big games far less sketchy when PM is off even if some people feel the need to circumvent that...maybe have it set that if you're playing a game with someone and the setting of No PM is checked than you get blocked from using the global PM with everyone in the game too until the game was finished. If we had to lose the no PM option tho I'd probably rather leave it as is

I like this! or have an inbox with messages

I'd appreciate clarification on whether the in-game private message option would be disabled, as I would remove my vote for this option.

While there are always ways to communicate outside a game, if someone is so inclined, I think "PM's off" implies there should be no private communication or treaties. With a global PM system, this would obviously be an honor system, but I think it's an important distinction for a game creator to state. In a game with PM's off, what pinkbladder is suggesting, I would consider to be cheating.

Randy what some people do is message in other games anyway so i dont think its a big deal. i used to even create H2H games solely to talk to ppl in team games with chat off

Please note: If this is implemented, it also means that the ability to turn off private messages for a specific game would be removed. There wouldn't be any point in turning it off for a game if you could still send them a message via the global PM system.

I like this idea.