Quote by brucie
ultra intolerant uber-mod. the chatrooms need some serious quality control.
sign the petition here:
brucie for chief cock sucker, love BIoke x
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
i should be given the role of
last reply
63 replies
3.3k views
0 watchers
0 likes
Sex God
Oi wat ya mean "Quality Control" :twisted:
Ohh and if u wana be a Mod, that means u would have 2 delete ur own posts
because a mod deals with forum issues, not chatroom one's
Love Bambi,
69 Quality Street,
Birmingham,
BIG PRPL1
Ohh and if u wana be a Mod, that means u would have 2 delete ur own posts
because a mod deals with forum issues, not chatroom one's
Love Bambi,
69 Quality Street,
Birmingham,
BIG PRPL1
Quote by brucie
I would start by banning everyone who didnt "do it for me".
your ironing?
"non-iron" shirts. best invention since sliced bread and the iPod.
Rubbish - you still look a scruffy bastard if you turn up at a meeting without ironing them. I had you down as more of a starched double cuffs kinda guy.. maybe my perceptions of you are all wrong
Quote by __random_orbit__
as long as all concerned are happy with an apparent indescretion, I guess that's okay.
lp
She seems happy to reveal who she's met of an afternoon in Chat so this likely isn't an issue. In fact I was there when Hackett Man & her were discussing said things.. and then there was some other guy called fruity2009 or something - he featured on her 'sharing' list too :-)
Hacket is quite good actually... sexy, understated and not too 'gay'.
Quote by BIoke
as long as all concerned are happy with an apparent indescretion, I guess that's okay.
lp
She seems happy to reveal who she's met of an afternoon in Chat so this likely isn't an issue. In fact I was there when Hackett Man & her were discussing said things.. and then there was some other guy called fruity2009 or something - he featured on her 'sharing' list too :-)
Hacket is quite good actually... sexy, understated and not too 'gay'.
Are you kidding me? It's bad enough repeating something that was said in Chat - where comments are short-lived, and you know who's reading them - but then to reveal who was on someone's "sharing list" whether this means someone she's met or someone else she's discussed her meets with - is it me who's lost the plot?
Quote by Cherrytree
Are you kidding me? It's bad enough repeating something that was said in Chat - where comments are short-lived, and you know who's reading them - but then to reveal who was on someone's "sharing list" - is it me who's lost the plot?
No, I'm not kidding you.
My point was that if she's happy to share with a room of up to 80 users who she's meeting that she cleary won't be pissed off by brucie's alleged indiscretions.
I changed the username of the other guy so I'm not being indiscreet.
No, I don't think you've lost the plot.
It really pisses me off more and more nowadays that some members' only active contribution to this Forum is when they choose to damn other people - they say f**k all else the rest of the time! My attitude is, if you haven't got anything nice/funny/interesting to say then shut the f**k up and stop criticising others!
Quote by BIoke
as long as all concerned are happy with an apparent indescretion, I guess that's okay.
lp
She seems happy to reveal who she's met of an afternoon in Chat so this likely isn't an issue. In fact I was there when Hackett Man & her were discussing said things.. and then there was some other guy called fruity2009 or something - he featured on her 'sharing' list too :-)
Hacket is quite good actually... sexy, understated and not too 'gay'.
Are you kidding me? It's bad enough repeating something that was said in Chat - where comments are short-lived, and you know who's reading them - but then to reveal who was on someone's "sharing list" - is it me who's lost the plot?
No, I'm not kidding you.
My point was that if she's happy to share with a room of up to 80 users who she's meeting that she cleary won't be pissed off by brucie's alleged indiscretions.
I changed the username of the other guy so I'm not being indiscreet.
No, I don't think you've lost the plot.
It really pisses me off more and more nowadays that some members' only active contribution to this Forum is when they choose to damn other people - they say f**k all else the rest of the time! My attitude is,if you haven't got anything nice/funny/interesting to say then shut the f**k up and stop criticising others!
Are you addressing that to me, Bioke?
I did used to post, an awful lot. But then things changed, I didn't like the direction the forum was going in. Indiscretion was one of the issues I had. And there were other things. People being told to shut the f**k up.
And so, as you suggested, I decided to take a back seat.
However, the fact that you feel that I shouldn't post what I want to, just because it doesn't come under your accepted categories, has no bearing on me.
I will continue to post what I want, when I want.
Quote by GnV
Are you addressing that to me, Bioke?
No, you'll notice I used members' with the apostrophe after the 's' meaning more than one member.
Actually the opposite; in your context, it means one member...
The correct way would be not to use an apostrophe at all.
Thanks, I could never quite get my head around that at school ;-) But regardless, I wanted to make sure it wasn't seen as a personal comment.
I'm still confused though and like to know these things...
Surely one member would = member's and in this case the apostrophe replaces the need to write members's... I dunno
Sex God
Quote by BIoke
some members' only active contribution to this Forum is when they choose to
Sorry. I have to jump in here for the sake of apostrophe correctness preservation.
In the quote here, Bloke has used the apostrophe correctly.
He is talking about members plural and their contributions.
In this case, the apostrophe is to show possession: the contribution belonging to (made by) those members (plural)
So therefore the apostrophe goes after the plural noun members'
(It has no need of an extra s as it is already plural.)
Sexlightened
Quote by GnV
must find my copy of eats shoots and leaves
Unfortunately on this particular site, that title would have very little to do with grammar....
Sex God
Quote by GnV
must find my copy of eats shoots and leaves
Happy to be corrected; always good to learn. But that's how I was taught.
Sex God
Quote by BIoke
In the quote here, Bloke has used the apostrophe correctly.
Ah good, so I'm still perfect then? Phew.... there was me thinking my halo had slipped and was about to trip me up
Now that's irony ;)
Why is it iron like? :twisted:
Quote by Kaznkev
some members' only active contribution to this Forum is when they choose to
Sorry. I have to jump in here for the sake of apostrophe correctness preservation.
In the quote here, Bloke has used the apostrophe correctly.
He is talking about members plural and their contributions.
In this case, the apostrophe is to show possession: the contribution belonging to (made by) those members (plural)
So therefore the apostrophe goes after the plural noun members'
(It has no need of an extra s as it is already plural.)
So the only quote from a mod is about apostrophes,interesting,so we can name and shame now?
since it seems we are allowed to qoute other members without there permission there are a few people i would like to bring up,the single men without a partner claiming to be couples,the guys with multiple profiles,the guy who tried to beat me up,
i take it i can mention them all?
Or do the mods only come out to defend there boyfriend and his mates?
We don't do naming and shaming
:? :?If you believe they are members who have profiles that are deceitful - use the report this profile button.
We also have no control over anything that happens outside the site - but by all means report it and it will be noted.
I'm not clear why you think a moderator is defending another member? If you have a complaint to make regarding a moderator/s - put a support ticket in, send a message to the site owners, use the report profile.
going back to the 'indescretion' thing, that I believe may have been drawn to anyone's attention by me.
I would have though that a little timely reminder about descretion would never be a bad thing on a site such as this?
After all, we may not all want "all and sundry" to know our business?
A little mention that it might be something to hold in mind when posting at times should certainly never cause offence, and should indeed be taken in the good nature in which it was intended?
A simple reply along the lines of: "Oh indeed, descretion, have no fear here, all parties concerned and mentioned have no issue with being named, but thankyou for the pointer."
or no reply at all if you should feel that none is merited.
Know what I mean?
taking offence at the concern of one members thoughts for another members (or indeed any members) privacy, and then behaving as if that concern was a personal slight is silly and childish considering the consequences that a few ill-thought words can have.
lp
I would have though that a little timely reminder about descretion would never be a bad thing on a site such as this?
After all, we may not all want "all and sundry" to know our business?
A little mention that it might be something to hold in mind when posting at times should certainly never cause offence, and should indeed be taken in the good nature in which it was intended?
A simple reply along the lines of: "Oh indeed, descretion, have no fear here, all parties concerned and mentioned have no issue with being named, but thankyou for the pointer."
or no reply at all if you should feel that none is merited.
Know what I mean?
taking offence at the concern of one members thoughts for another members (or indeed any members) privacy, and then behaving as if that concern was a personal slight is silly and childish considering the consequences that a few ill-thought words can have.
lp
Quote by __random_orbit__
A simple reply along the lines of: "Oh indeed, descretion, have no fear here, all parties concerned and mentioned have no issue with being named, but thankyou for the pointer."
Quote by BIoke
She seems happy to reveal who she's met of an afternoon in Chat so this likely isn't an issue..... blah blah blah
I appear to have forgotten the 'thank you for the pointer' bit but apart from that I thought that's what I wrote :-?
fair point, though I would (maybe its just me) still hold diferent sections of the site, and the way in which they are used by members for different things to be something to consider.
Personally, and this IS purely personally... I might not feel particularly pleased if a conversation I was having in chat were repeated in the Cafe... context will have been lost and I might even think that outside that room other people might not appreciate being associated with me... see what I mean?
but anyway... it was a simple reminder about descretion....
... always something to bear in mind, wouldnt you think?
Not something to get all het up and defensive about.
lp
away to bed now, nighty night
Personally, and this IS purely personally... I might not feel particularly pleased if a conversation I was having in chat were repeated in the Cafe... context will have been lost and I might even think that outside that room other people might not appreciate being associated with me... see what I mean?
but anyway... it was a simple reminder about descretion....
... always something to bear in mind, wouldnt you think?
Not something to get all het up and defensive about.
lp
away to bed now, nighty night
Mod
Quote by flower411
It does bring up the issue of inconsistancy that I mentioned in another thread. If we were discussing a ban for instance, the thread would be immediately locked and the person bringing up the subjest would be told that they "wouldn`t want people discussing their private business"
So why is it ok to discuss who`s meeting who ....which I think makes a lot of members uncomfortable......but it`s not ok to discuss the reasons for bans ....which would nelp members to moderate their own behaviour ?
And before I get the angry moderator PM`s.....I haven`t got a gang and I`m not in a gang !!! Just because people have the same thoughts and concerns doesn`t mean they are colluding !!!
Stop being so paranoid !!
And that isn`t a "subtle dig" ..... it`s about as unsubtle as I can make it.
Another me, me, me post, Flower. Your ability to make every thread about your personal gripe is astounding. Nothing wrong with your consistency, is there?
Mal
