Old Steam room stuff

29 Sep 2005

Quote by Jas-Tim
I can't really see the connection with messing up a munch and getting back at the mods/site.

<<<< friendly observation mode >>>>> (yeah I know I'm a whimp rolleyes

but I'm a bruised whimp OK?).
Isn't it the case that anything that causes trouble internally for the site is bad for the site, the members andthe mods? There's been so much shit flying around these last few weeks which has involved quite a few of the mods, that they have retreated to the Ivory Tower on more than one occasion (I'm talking generically here). This has alienated them from a number of people.
This has been distinctly unpleasant and has induced some very aggressive reactions from those in positions of authority (actually I mean power). Intuitively, that, if one thinks about it, is a sign that something is wrong - especially for a place like this.
Seems to me that Libra+Love has actually succeeded.
So come on folks let's genuinely put things behind us. Some real quality people have been set at serious odds here and we really don't want that.
Time to draw a line methinks??

29 Sep 2005

Thats pretty much how I feel too Fluffer - there are lots of people who have been following this Steam Room thread who quite frankly are more than dissapointed at the general atmosphere here at the moment. All this airing of dirty laundry, backstabbing, gossiping, two-faced, snide rumour-mongering and shit stirring!! Fuck me this is a swingers site not the Jerry fookin Springer show.
With regard to Libra&Love's little confession above (assuming it is LL and not just some troll or other SH member with a wooden spoon) I'd say this pretty much justifies any ban that was made - and the reason why some people do not want to associate with her are now quite clear.
To jeopordise the safety and privacy of all munch-goers is the lowest of the low - making phone calls and generally being a two-faced super-grass with one hell of an agenda, willing to toy with the lives/emotions/welfare of people you have never even met in some dumb-ass attempt at a side swipe at someone you feel has 'wronged' you is nothing short of sick. I suggest you get some help LL - and your remaining friends on here (if they wish to associate with you now) should actively help you to do that. That, or go have yourself sectioned honey.

My main beef with this action by L+L is it affects totally unrelated people. Im new here really and reasonably nervous about going to my first munch next week. This amount of bad feeling is really not helping.. and if there was even the slightest chance that a feckin picket line of bible bashers was outside with a photographer from the local paper ..i'd be pretty mortified.
I personally am not ready yet to have my face splashed over the paper as a swinger and i'm really pissed off that anyone from here could have put anyone else in this potential situation.

Damn right! but remembering that this person is 'officially' no longer a memebr of this site, my feeling is that people's anger should be directed at whoever is passing on the information in order for L&L to make those calls in the first place.
Once you start playing games like this you're taking a direct hit at everyone who might want to attend munches and who use SH in general. And that automatically makes you an awful lot of enemies. :twisted:

29 Sep 2005

L+L, we met at the medieval munch, we had a laugh a play and some girlie snogs, what did I do wrong?????
If I did nothing wrong, why are you trying to hurt me?
I don't know the ins and outs of what happened to you, I appreciate that your hurt by the action the mods took, but the mods arn't the site, we all are. By trying to get back at the mods, your hurting the rest of us. Two wrongs dont make a right hun.
Good luck with what you are doing now and I do hope your successful, but please put the past behind you. Trying to hurt the mods is only going to cause hurt and heartache to a lot of people that don't deserve it, please L+L dont take it out on the rest of us.
As for those that are helping L+L(and I have no idea who you are), maybe L+L does have a valid excuse.....you dont!! By helping L+L with this hate campaign you are fuelling her anger and hurting a lot of people that do not deserve to be hurt.

29 Sep 2005

Hey, folks, this is just prolonging the agony - don't do it - just let it rest.

29 Sep 2005

Quote by Darkfire
With regard to Libra&Love's little confession above (assuming it is LL and not just some troll or other SH member with a wooden spoon) I'd say this pretty much justifies any ban that was made - and the reason why some people do not want to associate with her are now quite clear.

It wasn't a little confession, it was quite a big one. At least she made the effort to come on here and put over her opinion - something that was obviously denied her when she got banned.
Whilst I may not agree with all she does, I would never choose 'not to associate' with her - she is one of the best friends I have.

Quote by Darkfire
generally being a two-faced super-grass

At no point has L+L been two-faced. She is blatantly honest.

Quote by Darkfire
This amount of bad feeling is really not helping..

Quote by Darkfire
people's anger should be directed at whoever is passing on the information

Oh and that's going to make the site a better place is it?

29 Sep 2005

Quote by Darkfire
people's anger should be directed at whoever is passing on the information

The problem is - peoples anger gets directed at whoever they "think" they can make a connection to. It is all guess work. This is then why rumours start.
I know that at least one certain individual started the rumour that I was the leak (even though I hadn't had the venue details and requested that the new details NOT be sent to me) but the fact that I will not deny my friendship with Libra was enough to fuel this rumour. And once you have a few people following that rumour it is easy to blame the sins of the world onto this person.
Rather than directing anger - why not just try and remember....
people went to the munch.....
had a great time by all accounts......
nothing more happened.

29 Sep 2005

Quote by PoloLady
I know that at least one certain individual started the rumour that I was the leak

Just wondering if you are refering to me with that comment?

29 Sep 2005

Quote by marmalaid
I know that at least one certain individual started the rumour that I was the leak

Just wondering if you are refering to me with that comment?
No - I asked you about it, you told me it wasn't you. I beleive you.

29 Sep 2005

Quote by PoloLady
I know that at least one certain individual started the rumour that I was the leak

Just wondering if you are refering to me with that comment?
No - I asked you about it, you told me it wasn't you. I beleive you.
Thanks for confirming that, PL. Just goes to show that this place is doing some good in clearing up mistrusts and misunderstandings...
Chris
kiss

29 Sep 2005

Quote by SunBunny
Oh and that's going to make the site a better place is it?

Quite frankly, no, it wont make the site a better place. However, when animosity is being deflected onto people who really dont deserve it and have done nothing wrong but speak their mind, it sometimes helps to take stock and re-evaluate what's really happening and who the instigators are.
People are worried about the security at munches because information about venues etc etc is being passed to someone who has very openly told everyone here they they have a personal vendetta - not only against the Mods, but against any other user of this site. As they are no longer a member of SH, those who pass information on knowing full well by doing so they are compromising the security and discretion that comes part and parcel of SH, then they are as guilty as she is.
While your loyalty to your friend is admirable , I question why on earth you would feel the need to defend her under the circumstances, or associate at all.

Yes, I phoned the Leicester Council to inform them they needed to be aware of the 200+ ( slight exaggeration goes a long way) coming to the city as they were about to be set on with queries regarding this event from members of the public.
Yes, I phoned 4 churches in the area too, got them doing the Jesus dance over swingers in their town!
And finally I called the Leicester Mercury to let them know "Good ol' Stan's" swinging site was coming to town!
Unfortunatley (well, not really, was a fantastic payday) I had an overnight booking the night of the Leicester munch so couldn't be there myself. If I could have made it the venue would have been exposed once again.

I apologise for calling her two-faced SunBunny, what I actually meant was vindictive, nasty piece of work.
To be honest I'd be more concerned about the stability of my 'friends' mental health than I'd be jumping to her defence. But hey, nice mate! rolleyes

29 Sep 2005

Quote by PoloLady
people went to the munch.....
had a great time by all accounts......
nothing more happened.

I'm cant comment on this wholly as I wasnt at the munch - but I think I'm right in saying that a great time was had by all because the organiser went to the trouble of securing an alternative venue once people were aware of the potential danger (and I dont use that term lightly) LL's little vendetta resulted in for everyone planning to attend - and alot of effort was put in to averting this.
Nothing more happened because people who care about and are protective, not only of SH but of each other, pulled out the stops and bent over backwards to try to ensure that the welfare of all munch attendees was safeguarded.

29 Sep 2005

As Libra Love has sneaked in and posted there is not much more I need to say - This is Pololady and Sunbunny's "close friend" who they would like to bring along to future SH events - admitedly not munches. I am not really surprised that some people are reluctant to see that happen.
With friends like that I wouldn't need any enemies.
I think it is a good thing that Libra Love has posted in here - it gives everyone a chance to make up their own mind with regards to things. Maybe this is what the mods were hoping when they brought it all up again or maybe they were hoping certain people would breach the AUP and allow them to be banned hence resolving things that way?
Roger the Dragon cool

29 Sep 2005

I think you need to direct your thoughts to the possibilities of what may happen next. LL may appear at a public venue where an SH event is going on.

29 Sep 2005

I think I am safe in saying that... no one knows just who they might bump into at any public venue...
The great thing about an official SH Munch is that it would be ONLY SH members attending....
People are free to go where they like when they like to public things and non members who read these forums without having to even log in get a fair amount of information regarding meetings in these said public places, therefore its a chance you take in attending such events...
I do feel however that members of SH may have been in the wrong a tad, by publically saying they would be in the company of a banned member on the evening of an event being organised by SH member.... my opinion on it thats all.....Why make that statement... why not just go along anyway... why publically make it known... dunno

29 Sep 2005

Quote by notstopping4long
As I was the one who started this whole thing off I sneaked in to reply. No doubt this will be deleted (and I'll be banned but that's a given lol)
I was banned from SH WITHOUT having broken the AUP!
I corresponded with Mark who left the decission of unbanning me to the mods, who sent me an email of no explanation for my banning but let me know they didn't "have the will" to unban me. See, they do have a hit-list lol.
That got my hackles up, I retaliated and told them I'd get even. The mods response was, we don't care. So I showed them they would! It was from THAT point that I plotted to fuck with the mods and you guys.
(Now, how long after?, I hear rumour it was a temp ban on me. Bull-Shit!)
I found an opening and advertised my site in the chatroom. Hey they ban me without me breaking the AUP so I had to!
And from there....
Yes, I phoned the Leicester Council to inform them they needed to be aware of the 200+ ( slight exaggeration goes a long way) coming to the city as they were about to be set on with queries regarding this event from members of the public.
Yes, I phoned 4 churches in the area too, got them doing the Jesus dance over swingers in their town!
And finally I called the Leicester Mercury to let them know "Good ol' Stan's" swinging site was coming to town!
Unfortunatley (well, not really, was a fantastic payday) I had an overnight booking the night of the Leicester munch so couldn't be there myself. If I could have made it the venue would have been exposed once again.
During all this I let everyone on my msn know what I was doing.
I was angry at the mods who run this place so I targeted this place as a whole. I did NOT target individual SH members or individual mods. And God knows I could have abused a certain mod who's phone number I have. But it just aint worth it. That's when things become personal and I don't think I'd like myself much if I intentionally violated someone.
Total disregard I CAN do.
Why did I do it?
For the same reason the mods banned me that day.
They fucked me off so I pushed some buttons of my own! See, it works both ways.
Seems there's been more bannings and munch incidences again and only now is this area of moderation being called into question and the SH bong-drums being exposed
Anyway, that's what I am accountable for. If there are other misdemeanors you may feel I'm responsible for, please feel free to accredit to me.
I WAS DONE WITH YOU LOT.
STILL AM.
Just kept a few good friends and fobbed off a few faux ones.
Ok, delete away mods. Hide the truth again.
And yes, I know, I'm banned.
Don't worry, I'm already headed for the door.
lol...I wouldn't be a good whore if I couldn't find THAT hole and wood!
Libra+Love (Take note Postie, it has a + in the middle...focus on the positive for a change)
And she keeps on loving
No longer swinging on MingingHeaven

It does make one wonder who compromised the venue details and whether it was done with the assistance - or at least the knowledge - of current members who also happen to be LL's friends. Did they try to dissuade her from sabotaging the munch?
Coupled with the hate campaigns that have been conducted by these three members over the past year or so it's easy to see that there has been a great deal of collusion between them before they post. There are quite a few people who have been subjected to one of these poison-filled hate-fuelled campaigns and I am but one of those people. My pm inbox is testament to that.
SunBunny seems to have a real problem handling rejection - as others on THIS thread have indicated, they have seen her following my posts with some snipey comment of her own. God help any man who has the audacity to dump her (and there are reasons why guys have continually ended relationships with this woman) - but for the record, she left a cheap pair of handcuffs here and a length of skipping rope (not exactly the crown jewels!!) - both of which have long been binned, hence why I haven't returned them.
I am now at the point where my mouse hovers over the Submit button with absolute trepidation before each post I make at what may be posted after me by SunBunny or one of her cronies.
If SB was a car she would be stuck permanently in 'Reverse' - Move on ffs!..... I have!

29 Sep 2005

Quote by notstopping4long
I WAS DONE WITH YOU LOT.
STILL AM.

Yet you still feel the need to 'pop in' and read whats going on, create a new account and post.

Quote by notstopping4long
No longer swinging on MingingHeaven

Thank fuck for that - maybe you could stay away this time, you nasty piece of work.
And people complain "why was so-and-so banned" well, here is an excellent example of why! Mostly the membership as a whole does not know a lot which goes on in the background, this includes in the forum, chatroom, ads section or whatever, and need to accept the descisions made by Mods and/or Ops, which are invariably for the protection of the site and it's members from twats like this!
No one is banned for fuck-all, and this banning is/was, wholly justified.
Should banned people be allowed to attend functions as a members guest, not a fucking chance - that is unless you want the reporter and photographer from the daily scum rag or whatever paper it was they tried to sell the story to - which one was it again "notstopping4long" - Judas springs to mind ............................
I love it when people show their true colours.
It's time for people to make their choice, accept what has (rightly) happened, stand firm with the site, or fuck off and never darken the doorstep again - whether that be as a 'guest' at a function, or creating a new account - no one forces anyone to stay and the internet is a big place after all.

29 Sep 2005

Quote by duncanlondon
I think you need to direct your thoughts to the possibilities of what may happen next. LL may appear at a public venue where an SH event is going on.

After the last set of all too public events that have taken place then that is totally ok in the general scheme of things......After all it is a public place and its not a munch..
I do feel however that anyone whi gives information to a banned member regarding the where abouts of an official site activity(munch) then they should be privvey to a ban..
Simple as..
Now I am not aiming this comment at anyone in particular its just a statement of what I believe...
And as for munches themselves well....
At this present moment in time I believe they should be suspended untill further notice..
Tensions are running high at the moment and to be perfectly honest munches aint what they used to be.
They happen so frequently nowadays that they seem to have lost some of their magic.
Some folk seem to view them as a prelude to a shagfest in somebodys hotel room and that aint why they came about..

29 Sep 2005

Quote by Steve_Mids
And as for munches themselves well....
At this present moment in time I believe they should be suspended untill further notice..
Tensions are running high at the moment and to be perfectly honest munches aint what they used to be.
They happen so frequently nowadays that they seem to have lost some of their magic.
Some folk seem to view them as a prelude to a shagfest in somebodys hotel room and that aint why they came about..

And as a reminder, here is what a munch is SUPPOSED to be What is a Munch?
I agree with Steve_Mids re the halting of munches for a time to allow people to reflect on their true intention, and those that have occured recently.

29 Sep 2005

Quote by Jon

And as for munches themselves well....
At this present moment in time I believe they should be suspended untill further notice..
Tensions are running high at the moment and to be perfectly honest munches aint what they used to be.
They happen so frequently nowadays that they seem to have lost some of their magic.
Some folk seem to view them as a prelude to a shagfest in somebodys hotel room and that aint why they came about..

And as a reminder, here is what a munch is SUPPOSED to be What is a Munch?
I agree with Steve_Mids re the halting of munches for a time to allow people to reflect on their true intention, and those that have occured recently.
I am curious to know what you 2 mean by "halting"? I would agree with the removal of site-sanction from them but I do not see that it is really the mods/ops business if people still wish to organise them as socials.

29 Sep 2005

Quote by duncanlondon
I think you need to direct your thoughts to the possibilities of what may happen next. LL may appear at a public venue where an SH event is going on.

Libra+Love has asked me to say that she is done with SH and will not associate with it anymore. So fear not. She is no longer a risk to society. She will not be going to Chams, at least, not on that night.
And before anyone thinks it - I have not passed on any info. I did not recieve munch details.
Are we all totally innocent ? Are all the friends we have , on here, and IRL, perfect angels? Must we fall out with people we love because they do something that we may not agree with? What about all the other, wonderful things she does for me? Do you think I am friends with a mass murderer?
I do plenty of shit things and I piss plenty of people off. But I have a lot of real, lifelong friends.
Let's not focus on the negative, if we are to move forward in peace. smile

29 Sep 2005

Duplicate the sentiments of Jon and Steve.... I'd go for a suspension of any gathering having the priviledge of Swinging Heaven munch title..... only till things have settled and some faith is restored fully with the running and organisation of the Munches
MHO thats all

29 Sep 2005

Quote by SunBunny
Let's not focus on the negative, if we are to move forward in peace.

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: Oh! That's a cracker that is rolleyes

T-J

29 Sep 2005

Quote by rogerthedragon
I am curious to know what you 2 mean by "halting"? I would agree with the removal of site-sanction from them but I do not see that it is really the mods/ops business if people still wish to organise them as socials.

You also seem not to understand what a munch is then, as private socials are not munches............. Only site sanctioned Munches are munches
Once again, I direct you to the link What is a Munch

29 Sep 2005

Quote by rogerthedragon

And as for munches themselves well....
At this present moment in time I believe they should be suspended untill further notice..
Tensions are running high at the moment and to be perfectly honest munches aint what they used to be.
They happen so frequently nowadays that they seem to have lost some of their magic.
Some folk seem to view them as a prelude to a shagfest in somebodys hotel room and that aint why they came about..

And as a reminder, here is what a munch is SUPPOSED to be What is a Munch?
I agree with Steve_Mids re the halting of munches for a time to allow people to reflect on their true intention, and those that have occured recently.
I am curious to know what you 2 mean by "halting"? I would agree with the removal of site-sanction from them but I do not see that it is really the mods/ops business if people still wish to organise them as socials.
To be a munch does it not have to have the backing of the site?
For the time being I believe the site should say no to any more munches...
Socials are a different thing.....If peeps want to organice a party and take pot luck on who attends then so be it..

29 Sep 2005

Quote by rogerthedragon
Maybe this is what the mods were hoping when they brought it all up again or maybe they were hoping certain people would breach the AUP and allow them to be banned hence resolving things that way?
Roger the Dragon

Don't be silly, Roger, that would mean a hitlist exists, and we know it doesn't. We all know that some people don't get along, but that's not a reason to ban, or to sit waiting for the slightest mistake to ban somebody. I believe that if a mod really disliked a member then they could ban them just for that (I don't believe that happens, but I'm sure they could get away with it), if Mark wanted to he could certainly do it. The pure fact that we are here to have this heated discussion is testament to the general live and let live attitude of the mods and members.
{{{group hug}}}

29 Sep 2005

I have just one thing to say: it's very disheartening to see that someone who has in the past received so much support from members here when she needed it,
http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/swingers-forum/viewtopic/34428.html
seems now to be trying so hard to hurt the same people.
Mike.

29 Sep 2005

Quote by MikeNorth
I have just one thing to say: it's very disheartening to see that someone who has in the past received so much support from members here when she needed it,
http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/swingers-forum/viewtopic/34428.html
seems now to be trying so hard to hurt the same people.
Mike.

How the worm turns when things dont go their way eh??

29 Sep 2005

Quote by MikeNorth
I have just one thing to say: it's very disheartening to see that someone who has in the past received so much support from members here when she needed it,
http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/swingers-forum/viewtopic/34428.html
seems now to be trying so hard to hurt the same people.
Mike.

Well basically that was tough shit then and it still is now. Someone chose to pass on details which they should not have done by giving out her address confused

It's a weird kind of logic that says if you don't like having *your* security breached, that makes it OK to breach other peoples evil

T-J

29 Sep 2005

Quote by marmalaid
Maybe this is what the mods were hoping when they brought it all up again or maybe they were hoping certain people would breach the AUP and allow them to be banned hence resolving things that way?
Roger the Dragon

Don't be silly, Roger, that would mean a hitlist exists, and we know it doesn't. We all know that some people don't get along, but that's not a reason to ban, or to sit waiting for the slightest mistake to ban somebody. I believe that if a mod really disliked a member then they could ban them just for that (I don't believe that happens, but I'm sure they could get away with it), if Mark wanted to he could certainly do it. The pure fact that we are here to have this heated discussion is testament to the general live and let live attitude of the mods and members.
{{{group hug}}}
that is a load of bollocks too, there is no need for a "hitlist" because the site rules allow banning with no rhyme or reason, if 'someone' felt that way inclined.....

You are a guest on our private server and as such we
expect you to follow the server rules. Put simply
we will not tolerate anything illegal, including, but
not limited to, using our server to mediate the
distribution of 'warez' and/or child pornography. We
will also not tolerate the harassment of other users
on our server.
We reserve the right to deny you access to our server
at any time without giving you warning or reason.
We take no responsibility and explicitly disclaim all
liability for any harmful content which might pass via
our server, or the results of running any commands
while using the services we provide.
If you do not agree to our rules you should disconnect
now.

Details may be found for those of you interested enough to look.

29 Sep 2005

Quote by Jon
Maybe this is what the mods were hoping when they brought it all up again or maybe they were hoping certain people would breach the AUP and allow them to be banned hence resolving things that way?
Roger the Dragon

Don't be silly, Roger, that would mean a hitlist exists, and we know it doesn't. We all know that some people don't get along, but that's not a reason to ban, or to sit waiting for the slightest mistake to ban somebody. I believe that if a mod really disliked a member then they could ban them just for that (I don't believe that happens, but I'm sure they could get away with it), if Mark wanted to he could certainly do it. The pure fact that we are here to have this heated discussion is testament to the general live and let live attitude of the mods and members.
{{{group hug}}}
that is a load of bollocks too, there is no need for a "hitlist" because the site rules allow banning with no rhyme or reason, if 'someone' felt that way inclined..... That's just what I said rolleyes

Keep up, Jon, don't be surprised if we agree on occassions wink

:cheers: