Old Steam Room Stuff

10 Dec 2005

Quote by Yorks_Dave
Ok then, heres a serious question relating to the change in policy.
If I chose to post one of my private house parties on here and perhaps also through previous guests at my parties, and I receive requests from people to attend, how do I know who is a banned member here and who isn't ?
To make this workable I assume you will need to post a sticky somewhere listing all the banned members, so I can check potential guest against the list at the time of asking, to save everyone the embarrasment of having to go back to them and say, sorry you can't come as I've had to check my guests out.
Also what happens if someone attends, and unkown to me or any of my guests they are banned during the afternoon of the day of my party - am I therefore expected to check them out as they come to my door and turn them away at that point?
It strikes me that publishing a list of banned members is not acceptable, so therefore how can this be achieved ?
Simply put there is no practical way that this is workable - QED

If your potential guest contacted you via PM or by posting in your thread then he isn't banned, as he would not be able to PM or post. If we subsequently ban someone that we can see is on your guest list we will advise you.
If you invite someone that is banned and it is a genuine mistake, then of course you will not be blamed for that.
We will not be posting a list of banned people, but we may ask you to allow us to see the guest list. If there is someone banned on that list we will advise you.

10 Dec 2005

Quote by Sgt Bilko

WE also decided that in this case, after certain information had been brought to our attention, that it would be wise to warn members that Wishmaster had made threats against us. Again, this was done to protect the members of this site, and WE do have evidence to support that decision.
:

Can you tell me why then if Wishmaster has made threats but the guy on saturday actually carried physical/sexual abuse against me, why I can't name him on open forum as you have done with wishmaster in the interests of protecting site members that may have him on msn or such like?

10 Dec 2005

Quote by Yorks_Dave
Ok then, heres a serious question relating to the change in policy.
If I chose to post one of my private house parties on here and perhaps also through previous guests at my parties, and I receive requests from people to attend, how do I know who is a banned member here and who isn't ?
To make this workable I assume you will need to post a sticky somewhere listing all the banned members, so I can check potential guest against the list at the time of asking, to save everyone the embarrasment of having to go back to them and say, sorry you can't come as I've had to check my guests out.
Also what happens if someone attends, and unkown to me or any of my guests they are banned during the afternoon of the day of my party - am I therefore expected to check them out as they come to my door and turn them away at that point?
It strikes me that publishing a list of banned members is not acceptable, so therefore how can this be achieved ?
Simply put there is no practical way that this is workable - QED

I asked this earlier and was told that you should try to pm the person! (because if they are banned you can't) or ask a Mod!
Simple really .... until someone arranges a night out at a club! Presumably we can't be banned for that?
Whilst I do generally appreciate all the work put in by the Mods in keeping us safe there are at least two events that have been advertised and have been kept within the "rules". Assumably these people weren't consulted or warned before the change came into effect and whilst the Sarge has done a good job in explaining that all the Mods were involved then perhaps the cack handed way in which Mal posted (I saw the post before it was edited) was a bad decision in hindsight.
C

10 Dec 2005

Quote by Calista
then perhaps the cack handed way in which Mal posted (I saw the post before it was edited) was a bad decision in hindsight.

I think that Mal would agree, with hindsight, that it could have been better!! confused

:? :?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

10 Dec 2005

I've read the last few posts with great interest.
Many of my guests come as recommendations from other friends, often via other none website related contacts, with real names, not user names, so how am I or you going to be able to check them out?
To be able to pass my guest list onto you, I would have to ask for and recieve everyones permission for a third party to be able to view and vet my guest list.
Please lets be real about this - do you really think I would let people into my home who I consider to be a real and present danger to my other guests or myself?

10 Dec 2005

on a lighter note our troops are still in iraq confused

:

10 Dec 2005

To be honest Yorks_Dave I think the answer is not to advertise it on the forums.... If you accept people by recommendation then you cant verify them as not being banned from here..
Sorry dunno

Shireen
xxx

10 Dec 2005

Quote by Yorks_Dave
Please lets be real about this - do you really think I would let people into my home who I consider to be a real and present danger to my other guests or myself?

Not intentionally, no!! :shock: :shock: :shock:

10 Dec 2005

i don't think there is an answer to the banning notification. I do appreciate what has been said about the named individual and agree I'm not in full possession of all the facts but it seems to me that there is a case of one rule for one at the mods discretion.
It's not always easy to keep up with the grapevine and it has always been MHO that the grapevine is more dangerous than a single line statement re a banning. I was absent from the site for a few months over the summer and it was only with the "where are they now" thread that I found out at least two people I had chatted to on MSN had been banned!!!!
What's upset me at the moment though is how this whole thing has been handled, people on Kaz's list were aware from the beginning that a banned member had been invited and took their choice from that ... she was upfront and honest and is now facing a ban unless she jumps through a new hoop.
Introducing the new rules is fine by me but there are two events that have been organised this way and I am sure that the new rules could be introduced from today and all subsequent posts with a MOD warning on the posts affected.
Threatening to ban her or else seems to me to be rather harsh.
C x

10 Dec 2005

Quote by Sgt Bilko
Ice,
Mal didn't change the rules. WE, the Moderators did. :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:
WE did so to protect the members of this site, and I for one will not apologise for that. WE are not saying that organisers of Socials can't invite banned members, because clearly they can and WE would not tell people who their friends should be. WE can however stop people from advertising such events on this site, and that is what WE have decided to do.
The rules of this site can and will be changed as and when WE feel it is necessary. After much debate amongst the mods WE decided that in this case there was a need for a rule change.
WE also decided that in this case, after certain information had been brought to our attention, that it would be wise to warn members that Wishmaster had made threats against us. Again, this was done to protect the members of this site, and WE do have evidence to support that decision.
Mal merely posted the decision of the mods - don't shoot the messenger!!!! :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:

OK, the mods have a problem with Wishmaster and he's banned, fair enough. But why punish kaz? Is it her fault?

10 Dec 2005

Quote by Yorks_Dave
I've read the last few posts with great interest.
Many of my guests come as recommendations from other friends, often via other none website related contacts, with real names, not user names, so how am I or you going to be able to check them out?
To be able to pass my guest list onto you, I would have to ask for and recieve everyones permission for a third party to be able to view and vet my guest list.
Please lets be real about this - do you really think I would let people into my home who I consider to be a real and present danger to my other guests or myself?

Dave,
You know exactly what the score is ..... read as many posts as you like with great interest but at the end of the day you know as well as I do that people's concerns aren't about your non-website related contacts.
Sit on the fence by all means ..... but don't regard those of us that don't sit on the fence as though we don't know what we're talking about.
Steve

10 Dec 2005

Quote by steveg_nw
I've read the last few posts with great interest.
Many of my guests come as recommendations from other friends, often via other none website related contacts, with real names, not user names, so how am I or you going to be able to check them out?
To be able to pass my guest list onto you, I would have to ask for and recieve everyones permission for a third party to be able to view and vet my guest list.
Please lets be real about this - do you really think I would let people into my home who I consider to be a real and present danger to my other guests or myself?

Dave,
You know exactly what the score is ..... read as many posts as you like with great interest but at the end of the day you know as well as I do that people's concerns aren't about your non-website related contacts.
Sit on the fence by all means ..... but don't regard those of us that don't sit on the fence as though we don't know what we're talking about.
Steve
And just to play devil's advocate further, when did you ever advertise your parties in the forum Dave? I don't think your parties are socials either are they confused

: and therefore wouldn't fall under the new rules anyway dunno

10 Dec 2005

i'm going to dive in here... I'm worried that policy lumps together truly undesirable people (such as ones who don't understand that no means no) and people who verbally transgress the rules by (for example) mentioning another site, but ignores a third type of problem person, the serial confirm-but-non-attender. I think an ideal solution would let munch organisers have their lists monitored, and problem people highlighted, before blame is put on them.
If there is no public list of who is banned and how serious their offence was, it's unreasonable to expect munch organisers to be able to filter out banned people.

10 Dec 2005

Quote by Mister_Discreet
i'm going to dive in here... I'm worried that policy lumps together truly undesirable people (such as ones who don't understand that no means no) and people who verbally transgress the rules by (for example) mentioning another site, but ignores a third type of problem person, the serial confirm-but-non-attender. I think an ideal solution would let munch organisers have their lists monitored, and problem people highlighted, before blame is put on them.
If there is no public list of who is banned and how serious their offence was, it's unreasonable to expect munch organisers to be able to filter out banned people.

Kaz has from the beginning made it clear that a banned member would be attending and therefore people have been able to make an informed choice about their attendance and their own safety.
To suddenly pull the rug out and say to Kaz tough, delete the post or uninvite him or be banned is unfair when all along she has played the game and followed the rules.
Cx

10 Dec 2005

Quote by Calista
i'm going to dive in here... I'm worried that policy lumps together truly undesirable people (such as ones who don't understand that no means no) and people who verbally transgress the rules by (for example) mentioning another site, but ignores a third type of problem person, the serial confirm-but-non-attender. I think an ideal solution would let munch organisers have their lists monitored, and problem people highlighted, before blame is put on them.
If there is no public list of who is banned and how serious their offence was, it's unreasonable to expect munch organisers to be able to filter out banned people.

Kaz has from the beginning made it clear that a banned member would be attending and therefore people have been able to make an informed choice about their attendance and their own safety.
To suddenly pull the rug out and say to Kaz tough, delete the post or uninvite him or be banned is unfair when all along she has played the game and followed the rules.
Cx
I recieved a pm from a mod asking to post that non sh members were attending, after discussion and submitting my revision for approval I was given the green light. Anyone that has asked for details of non members banned and otherwise have been given them with full consent of the non members.
I have played by everyone of the rules asked of me but the goal posts have been moved again........fair I think not.
Yes a mod has given me permission to keep posting till monday....thankyou........but that really isnt the point.
Why am I being used as a scapegoat for all the politics going on?
Also I would like an answer to the post I made earlier, again it seems that there is one rule for one and another for others?

Can you tell me why then if Wishmaster has made threats but the guy on saturday actually carried physical/sexual abuse against me, why I can't name him on open forum as you have done with wishmaster in the interests of protecting site members that may have him on msn or such like?

10 Dec 2005

Quote by Calista
Kaz has from the beginning made it clear that a banned member would be attending and therefore people have been able to make an informed choice about their attendance and their own safety.

That's actually a different sort of scenario - I was thinking more about people who's status was not known to the organiser. I don't wan't to get drawn into making this a personal discussion of specific people, but I'm not sure that people can make very informed choices without naming and shaming, and here Wishmaster does happen to be a good example, I believed he was banned for recruiting for another non-commercial site until I read this thread.

10 Dec 2005

OK don't you think its time someone stood up and said i made a mistake and shouldn't have named wishmaster....As after all it is a libelous statement and be dam sure he has a screen shot of it and there is a lot of people here that would stand up and say yes i saw it leaving the site open to a libel action
IMHO the person responsible for the outburst should be dealt with and leave Kaz the fuck alone to enjoy her birthday party

10 Dec 2005

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

10 Dec 2005

Quote by blonde
I cant do this anymore .............. Only the Mods know the truth !

Oh, so kaz doesn't know the truth? Well if that's the case, why is she being threatened for something she knows nothing about?
This question is directed at the mods in general and at Mal in particular.

10 Dec 2005

Quote by Ice Pie
I cant do this anymore .............. Only the Mods know the truth !

Oh, so kaz doesn't know the truth? Well if that's the case, why is she being threatened for something she knows nothing about?!?!?!?!?!?

10 Dec 2005

Quote by blonde
I cant do this anymore .............. Only the Mods know the truth !

Oh, so kaz doesn't know the truth? Well if that's the case, why is she being threatened for something she knows nothing about?!?!?!?!?!?
I dont know babe !!!
C ya xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thanks blonde evil

the pm you sent me and I have it copied to a word document makes no mention of the accusations you are now making.
Have a laugh on me why dont you, when did I become piggy in the middle for your love life!!
kaz

10 Dec 2005

Quote by kazswallows
I cant do this anymore .............. Only the Mods know the truth !

Oh, so kaz doesn't know the truth? Well if that's the case, why is she being threatened for something she knows nothing about?!?!?!?!?!?
I dont know babe !!!
C ya xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thanks blonde evil

the pm you sent me and I have it copied to a word document makes no mention of the accusations you are now making.
Have a laugh on me why dont you, when did I become piggy in the middle for your love life!!
kaz
this is also screen shot!

10 Dec 2005

Kaz ............... u need to direct your anger at the Mods or Ops ............. not me ......... I am just a member............. same as you babe
Take care
Sam xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

10 Dec 2005

Quote by Angel Chat
I've read the last few posts with great interest.
Many of my guests come as recommendations from other friends, often via other none website related contacts, with real names, not user names, so how am I or you going to be able to check them out?
To be able to pass my guest list onto you, I would have to ask for and recieve everyones permission for a third party to be able to view and vet my guest list.
Please lets be real about this - do you really think I would let people into my home who I consider to be a real and present danger to my other guests or myself?

Dave,
You know exactly what the score is ..... read as many posts as you like with great interest but at the end of the day you know as well as I do that people's concerns aren't about your non-website related contacts.
Sit on the fence by all means ..... but don't regard those of us that don't sit on the fence as though we don't know what we're talking about.
Steve
And just to play devil's advocate further, when did you ever advertise your parties in the forum Dave? I don't think your parties are socials either are they confused

: and therefore wouldn't fall under the new rules anyway dunno

Thanks for the replies you guys ....
Maybe I was usuing my functions to merely illustrate a point, or to sort out in my own mind how I might have to approach running or indeed attending a purely social function - in either scenario the questions raised remain unanswered, and leave many people wondering.
Perhaps the only point that has been clarified is that this ruling does not apply to events which involve real swinging.

10 Dec 2005

in all honestly the only objection i have to non -sh members attendinf functions i go to is if is someone i dislike!
not because they are banned, just if i dislike them as a person lol. lol

sayting that, i dislike some people who are not banned too... so hardly make a difference lol :lol:

10 Dec 2005

Quote by SirLee
As after all it is a libelous statement and be dam sure he has a screen shot of it and there is a lot of people here that would stand up and say yes i saw it leaving the site open to a libel action

Just picking up this bit.
It can only be libelous if we post something slanderous about a person that is not true, do you honestly think we would have taken that risk?

10 Dec 2005

Hi all......
I have thought about this some more.....
i think this whole topic is a grey area, the mods are trying to protect SH members saftey but also let us have a free reign. To be honest the mods must have known that there were socials planned with the possibility that banned members would be attending.
I think social organisers would have apprciated some forewarning of the new rule changes. So other other arrangments could be made.
I agree with dave, how am i to know who is banned and who isnt. The mods have already said they will not name and shame, but then a social attendance list would have to be sent to a mod.
I am sure mods do not want to check every PVT meet and social list that is on SH to make sure a person is not BANNED member. I am also some people would not want a mod to know what is haperning in PVT meets for a vairty of reasons as people meeting habbits some people like to keep discret.
I am sure that the mods are discreet however i personal would not want mods knowing who i meet with.
MikeC

10 Dec 2005

Quote by Jags
Mike - you can invite who you want to your house but you can't advertise that social on this site. We are not trying to police socials, just keep the unsuspecting members out of what we consider to be danger.
Hope this helps.

8-)

10 Dec 2005

Well Iâ€™ve kept me mouth shut for long enough.
Did Voddy know Wishmaster had made threats to the Mods ????????? No she didnâ€™t. But it didnâ€™t stop her getting banned for 2 weeks. And to clarify matters that social wasnâ€™t for the benefit of Wishmaster it was for her new partner to meet everyone.
Did Kaz know, no she didnâ€™t until now , and now sheâ€™s being threatened with a ban
Think this has gone too far now, Kaz explained there would be non members attending and everyone going is happy with that. Suddenly you move the goal posts and her party is in jeopardy. Bang out of order.
Surely we have a choice isnâ€™t it our right?. After all we are a democracy arenâ€™t we?
If there is someone going who has made a threat then donâ€™t punish the organiser and everyone else in the process. who havent been threatened at all
By changing the Rules to suit youâ€™ve angered a lot of people, and left a lot of questions unanswered. Very bad move naming and shaming, has he actually carried out these alleged threats?
Poor Kaz was assaulted by a member, how come she canâ€™t name and shame. Or is it a one rule for one scenario
End of rant

10 Dec 2005

Not wanting to jump in to this particular arguement for which I can see pro's and cons, but who moderates the moderators.
Do we get to have a vote of no confidence or referendum ??
There is a poll option, ffs use it mad

Democracy rules, or is it only when you agree or are a personal friend confused