Behaviour at a &quot;munch &quot;

19 Feb 2007

Quote by lilnfil

Nothing is being dismissed PL - people DO know where they stand and what behaviour is acceptable and what will happen if they chose to ignore it.

so then we can definitely say that the flashing of tits and arses isn't a problem,because the 'who'swho,pervcam at wakefield' thread shows this happening dunno

as for "people do know" and "what will happen if they choose to ignore it" :dunno:
fil :dunno:
......... and does it stop at just tits and arses then?
Sam xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

19 Feb 2007

What about when it's two women snogging, having a good grope right in front of you, hands up one another's skirt?

19 Feb 2007

Quote by Freckledbird
What about when it's two women snogging, having a good grope right in front of you, hands up one another's skirt?

we have already established that this is unacceptable,i'm suprised you had to ask
Freckledbird wink

the point i'm trying to make now, is that we have two threads running at the moment that seem to be in conflict with each other over site rules
are we the only ones seeing this confused

fil

19 Feb 2007

Quote by Jags
The more rules the Admin team put into anything the more the complaints and whines and incidents which need dealing with.

I am sorry that bit just doesn't sit well with me.
Something is either wrong or it isn't - worrying about the amount of complaints/incidents should not be a reason to not clarify or indeed have a rule. If anything, a concern that incidents will be reported in higher numbers is all the more reason to support a need rather than dismiss it.
A clear rule should reduce the amount of incidents as the ambiguity is removed. People would know where they stand, what behaviour is acceptable and what will happen if they choose to ignore it.
We've got the rule - no sexual activity at Munches.
As for dealing with stuff... everyone here is an adult and should be able to behave themselves in an adult fashion given the skeleton of the rules.
I agree they should, however it is evident from comments in this thread that they don't and also evident people are not sure where the line is drawn.

Quote by Jags
If we bring in a rule saying 'no tit's out at a Munch' then there would a huge increase in the number of complaints, a huge increase in the hassle.

Or, would not so many people get their tits out because it was now clearly breaking the rule?

Quote by Jags
If people can't be bothered or chose to ignore the one simple rule then how on earth a Munch can be 'policed' with a myriad of other rules for them to ignore is mindblowing.

How can it be policed if there is no clear definition of what is and isn’t acceptable – people can’t even agree on what constitutes a ‘sexual act’.
I believe some of the sexual acts happen due to 'one-step-further' syndrome...
Well it is ok for her to get her tits out so it is OK for me to get mine tweaked.
Well it is OK for her to get her tits tweaked so it is OK for me to get mine sucked.
Well it is OK for her to get her tits sucked so it is OK for me to get my cock tugged.
Well if it is OK for....

Quote by Jags
Nothing is being dismissed PL - people DO know where they stand and what behaviour is acceptable and what will happen if they chose to ignore it.

If that truly was the case - why are there so many comments just in this thread about what is and isn't acceptable based on personal opinions? Why are people debating where the line sits? Why are people debating what does and doesn’t bother them?
Why are people trying to define what is acceptable and what is not by comparing behaviour to that which they have seen in nightclubs? (which btw if we are truly looking for a social setting I would have thought working more on a basis of what is acceptable in a supermarket would be a clearer guide to social behaviours rather that a bunch of pissed-up adolescents)

19 Feb 2007

What's a Munch?
A munch is a purely social event held in a totally neutral environment, often somewhere like a pub, where members of Swinging Heaven get to meet each other. As there's no play involved everyone can relax which gives newbies a chance to ask questions of the more experienced without any fear of getting jumped on, and gives the regulars time to catch-up with old friends and make new ones.

I don't know what there is to debate?
The rules are above ........ have they changed?
It doesnt say ...... "some play" or "a little bit of play" or "get your tits out and show your arses" coz that's OK .......... it says NO PLAY!
Sam xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

19 Feb 2007

Quote by lilnfil
the point i'm trying to make now, is that we have two threads running at the moment that seem to be in conflict with each other over site rules
are we the only ones seeing this
fil

No you are not wink

19 Feb 2007

Quote by blonde
What's a Munch?
A munch is a purely social event held in a totally neutral environment, often somewhere like a pub, where members of Swinging Heaven get to meet each other. As there's no play involved everyone can relax which gives newbies a chance to ask questions of the more experienced without any fear of getting jumped on, and gives the regulars time to catch-up with old friends and make new ones.

I don't know what there is to debate?
The rules are above ........ have they changed?
It doesnt say ...... "some play" or "a little bit of play" or "get your tits out and show your arses" coz that's OK .......... it says NO PLAY!
Sam xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
so why is no one complaining about the other thread showing it happening rolleyes

btw hiya Sam kiss

fil

19 Feb 2007

fil ........... I dont know!
Hiya to you 2 too!
Sam xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

19 Feb 2007

Why don't the ones who see the problem give a solution rather than just disagreeing with comments.
Tell me what you think SH should do...shall I pull the thread and delete it? Shall I ban the people in the photos? What??
Answers are much better than questions.

19 Feb 2007

Quote by Jags
Why don't the ones who see the problem give a solution rather than just disagreeing with comments.
Tell me what you think SH should do...shall I pull the thread and delete it? Shall I ban the people in the photos? What??
Answers are much better than questions.

Fair point :thumbup:
Draw a line under the past - no point trying to change the past - just learn from it.
Make a clear statement (the site that is) on the way forward defining what 'type' of behaviour the rule covers.
As for the other thread - tough one. Whilst it may not be popular, my only suggestion (after some thought) is to lock it with a closing note refering to the 'new start' and how it's continuation could cause confusion.

19 Feb 2007

Quote by PoloLady
Why don't the ones who see the problem give a solution rather than just disagreeing with comments.
Tell me what you think SH should do...shall I pull the thread and delete it? Shall I ban the people in the photos? What??
Answers are much better than questions.

Fair point :thumbup:
Draw a line under the past - no point trying to change the past - just learn from it.
Make a clear statement (the site that is) on the way forward defining what 'type' of behaviour the rule covers.
As for the other thread - tough one. Whilst it may not be popular, my only suggestion (after some thought) is to lock it with a closing note refering to the 'new start' and how it's continuation could cause confusion.
totally agree.
contradictions and grey areas breed confusion and hypocrisy.

19 Feb 2007

Thanks PL.
My view is that locking is pointless as the images remain on view and will only serve to give the wrong impression of condoning the bad behaviour which would be entirely wrong.
My vote is for deleting it entirely.
I'm a bit amused to see some of those involved in the overt sexual behaviour taking part in the debate without owning up!!

19 Feb 2007

Quote by Jags
My vote is for deleting it entirely.
I'm a bit amused to see some of those involved in the overt sexual behaviour taking part in the debate without owning up!!

:thumbup: for deleting it entirely!
Can't comment on who was and wasn't there, because we weren't.
But ..... Thanks Jags
Sam xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

19 Feb 2007

Quote by Jags
Thanks PL.
My view is that locking is pointless as the images remain on view and will only serve to give the wrong impression of condoning the bad behaviour which would be entirely wrong.
My vote is for deleting it entirely.

I didn't like to suggest that - but - if the rule does indeed cover 'no tits out' then you are probably right.

19 Feb 2007

One of the reasons why I didn't want cameras at the Nottingham Munch.

19 Feb 2007

I'm guilty of having my photo taken for Phoenix's puzzle thread but I would hope that I wouldn't be banned for that! :shock:
I wouldn't get my tits out in full view of other people in public whether it be a vanilla event or a swinging event... that's my personal choice. I have pics on my profile but they're the ones I've chosen to show (mostly cause you can't see my spare tyre!) and that's on my terms and within the AUP and people can choose to look at them if they wish or not if they don't. I don't think the odd flash here or there is anything out of the ordinary although like someone has said already, watching someone parading across the dancefloor isn't really my thing, nor do I think it's appropriate for the newbies who put their trust in the regulars to treat them with respect and have some consideration for their feelings.
I realise there are wide and varied degrees of likes and dislikes from people right across this and other sites. There are voyuers and exhibitionists and that's fine with me. I've had girlie snogs and blokie snogs at the munches I've been at but I know how to behave myself and alcohol or no alcohol I would like to think that I have enough common sense to know the difference between what's acceptable and what's not.
I don't think the rules need changed, I think we as adults should know how to behave within the guidelines set out by SH. Maybe the thought to remember if you are in any doubt is "would your mother approve?!" wink

Actually... scrap that cause my mum would have a hairy fit if she saw me snogging a girlie!! :giggle:
You know what I'm saying though... I've said it before and I'll say it again, respect is the key word and one we should all remember whether it be respect for yourself or for everyone around you!

19 Feb 2007

Quote by Jags
Why don't the ones who see the problem give a solution rather than just disagreeing with comments.
Tell me what you think SH should do...shall I pull the thread and delete it? Shall I ban the people in the photos? What??
Answers are much better than questions.

this is why we have management,to make decisions for us wink

firstly,the thread in question does not offend us at all,but it certainly is confusing and conflicting with issues raised in this thread
also for anyone reading small clip pits of this thread,the who's who,pervcam at wakfield has nothing to do with why this thread was started
i suppose it needs to be written into the rules that exposing ones body parts,for want of a better phrase,isn't least we'll know where we stand
for the people that do break the rules...........
well that has definitely got to be a managerial decision
lilnfil xx

btw,please don't ban any members that appear in the photos because there is one still to come where lil has got her tits out lol

19 Feb 2007

I haven't read all of this, but from what I've read on the last few posts I'm guessing it's going round in circles.
So
Acceptable dress - nothing that would/could be deemed over the top in a vanilla pub. e.g. If you want to go out with no knickers on thats fine, just make sure your skirts long enough to not everyone else has to know.
Acceptable Conduct - As above. If the person you're flirting with fancies a bit of a snog - fine. If it's hands up skirts/down tops, sexual acts get a room.
I can understand newbies feeling uncomfortable coming forward and reporting poor behaviour, so I think we should all play a part in keeping the organiser/door staff informed of unacceptable behaviour.
But hopefully we can try and encourage newer members to come forward - maybe using the hand holders as a point of reference dunno

I think a warning in the 1st instance is fine, but if the people carry on with any unacceptable behaviour, they should be shown the door.
I also think the names should be passed to the mods and if they start to see a pattern forming then the people concerned should be banned from attending munches.
That's my 2 pence worth.

19 Feb 2007

Quote by lilnfil
this is why we have management,to make decisions for us

FFS - do you think weare management? Are younot an adult and able to make your own behavioural decisions without someone telling you off? :eeek: :eeek:
There already is a perfectly usable rule about sexual behaviour which was ignored - as for banning, it's happening!
And the thread has gone.
:twisted:

19 Feb 2007

Quote by lilnfil
Why don't the ones who see the problem give a solution rather than just disagreeing with comments.
Tell me what you think SH should do...shall I pull the thread and delete it? Shall I ban the people in the photos? What??
Answers are much better than questions.

this is why we have management,to make decisions for us wink

firstly,the thread in question does not offend us at all,but it certainly is confusing and conflicting with issues raised in this thread
also for anyone reading small clip pits of this thread,the who's who,pervcam at wakfield has nothing to do with why this thread was started
i suppose it needs to be written into the rules that exposing ones body parts,for want of a better phrase,isn't least we'll know where we stand
for the people that do break the rules...........
well that has definitely got to be a managerial decision
lilnfil xx

btw,please don't ban any members that appear in the photos because there is one still to come where lil has got her tits out lol

this thread was advertised in the sticky of invites about what was going to happen. Everyone had a choice to have their photo taken & then again before the thread of the photos had started.
and I for one want to see lils photo :lol:
mines not come up yet either

19 Feb 2007

Quote by Jags
I'm a bit amused to see some of those involved in the overt sexual behaviour taking part in the debate without owning up!!

now this statement has confused us
are you now talking about what happened at nw munch or wakefield
if you are talking about nw,then i(fil), didn't see it and lil has looked through the thread again and can't see any of the people "involved in the overt sexual behaviour" taking part in any of the debate

if you are talking about wakefield we have already said that lil was photographed with her tits out for the thread
just felt that this needed pointing out
lilnfil xx

19 Feb 2007

Quote by PoloLady
So if some guy pulls down his wife’s pants, bends her over a table and inserts a daffodil up her arse… as long as they are both laughing and don’t look aroused it is acceptable then
:grin:

Daffodils prefer a cooler climate than the average arse can provide and for this reason I would go for the Lily, it prefers a warmer climate and produces a bigger head that wouldn't look as lost as a daffodil would in some of the arses I've seen paraded around a munch floor for public view. :smug:

19 Feb 2007

Quote by davej
Daffodils prefer a cooler climate than the average arse can provide and for this reason I would go for the Lily, it prefers a warmer climate and produces a bigger head that wouldn't look as lost as a daffodil would in some of the arses I've seen paraded around a munch floor for public view. :smug:

Thats the second keyboard tonight!!!
I now have them both drying out on the radiator :giggle:
Sam xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

19 Feb 2007

Quote by hisandhers
this thread was advertised in the sticky of invites about what was going to happen. Everyone had a choice to have their photo taken & then again before the thread of the photos had started.
and I for one want to see lils photo
mines not come up yet either

My point exactly, i would have thought that mods/ops would have informed us prior to the munch that this was not acceptable - i agree totally with the dance floor or sex show thing - but to me, seeing how this was publicised in the open and done discreetly - i for one did not think it would have been such a problem and the thread did run for quite a while, confirming that it was not such a problem :confused2:

Quote by Jags
There already is a perfectly usable rule about sexual behaviour which was ignored - as for banning, it's happening!
And the thread has gone.
:twisted:

I hope this is in respect to the NW munch and not the Wakefield one, the pics from the thread that has been deleted, were not, in my opinion, under any sexual behaviour, as said before, i wear less on a public beach - are all the munchers that had a photo taken at Wakefield going to get banned ???

19 Feb 2007

We are currently looking at complaints regarding the NW munch and complaints that a cake dawnie baked recently was shite, hardly any iceing and burnt round the edges which she tried to disguise by wrapping it with a fancy paper thingy....and thats all.

19 Feb 2007

:shock: Ok - thanks for the warning on Dawnie's cakes wink

19 Feb 2007

IMHO isnt it time we dropped the whole episode, obviously there is a myriad of opinions and a lot of them conflict with each other, a munch is a munch, a group of adults in one location add alcohol and like any other place on earth shit happens. U can never police it or control it...or have a munch where no alcohol is served and then u take that factor out of the equation.
People shud really now stop whinging and whining on about it, its happend, u cant turn back time and its likely it will happen again and again, there is always some incident or other at almost every munch.
It will always be a factor when you put 150 adults in a room and add copious amount of alcohol..even in the "vanilla" scene it happens ....
So lets get on with it stop whining and go get on with summat else instead...like ...
loadsa shagging...
thats my opinion and im sticking to it....
whatever anyone else says...

19 Feb 2007

I don't think I was confused when this thread started but I think I am now. :undecided:
The expression Play as in 'No Play' is a euphemism and as such probably does need some definition.
I would have thought that 'any activitiy that involves the exposure of sexual parts (including female breasts?? dunno

) would be more clear.
Suggestion of a solution with one small (or in some cases large) item to be decided.
.

19 Feb 2007

Quote by thumper
IMHO isnt it time we dropped the whole episode, obviously there is a myriad of opinions and a lot of them conflict with each other, a munch is a munch, a group of adults in one location add alcohol and like any other place on earth shit happens. U can never police it or control it...or have a munch where no alcohol is served and then u take that factor out of the equation.

Rubbish, of course you can 'police' it. Some munch venues make this easier than others, but hopefully this thread will have raised awareness that unacceptable behaviour will not be tolerated and offenders will be warned/removed/banned.

Quote by thumper
People shud really now stop whinging and whining on about it, its happend, u cant turn back time and its likely it will happen again and again, there is always some incident or other at almost every munch.

Regretably no, time can't be turned back, but the events in question have led to members being banned and will hopefully serve as a warning to others as to what will happen should their behaviour get out of control.

19 Feb 2007

"In every group of people there is always someone who tries to piss against the wind" ...sums it up really...that about closes the thread...
"In every group of people there is always someone who tries to piss against the wind"