Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login

Terminology of "SH Social Gatherings"

last reply
318 replies
9.4k views
1 watcher
0 likes

Does it matter ?

Yes
No
Results
HornyLittleBlonde
Sex God
Quote by Mal

And having seen the appalling treatment, and "clever" editing after being locked dished out to mike48 in his suggestions thread, I'm reluctant.

What 'clever' editing would that be? you're making out that that thread was manipulated after locking by moderators, which it wasn't. the only 'clever edit' as you so called it was the removal of my last post as Mike felt he was big enough to make his own defence.
Mal
Excellent idea Mal
I personally believed that Mike writing his own defence/explanation in his own words was a far better idea.
I'm glad you're taking the decision to let him post in the thread. Good work by the Mods as always :thumbup:
At least I'm assuming that's the reason you deleted your post confused
Unknown User
Quote by Mal

And having seen the appalling treatment, and "clever" editing after being locked dished out to mike48 in his suggestions thread, I'm reluctant.

What 'clever' editing would that be? you're making out that that thread was manipulated after locking by moderators, which it wasn't. the only 'clever edit' as you so called it was the removal of my last post as Mike felt he was big enough to make his own defence.
Mal
I don't want to divert or hijack this particular thread any further, but by the same token, I particularly don't want to take this to PM and have the discussion "behind closed doors"
That leaves me in a small quandary at the moment.
Mal
Mod
We're all ears.
Unknown User
Quote by Mal
We're all ears.

Quote by dambuster
SOCIALS
This seems to be where the grey area is showing itself in the forums.
I’ve always viewed posts about socials to be where maybe a dozen or so of us gather in a pub/eatery, take a couple of tables, or a corner for a few drink and a chat and giggle.
It seems to me, and I’m sure a few others, that some of the “socials” being posted are more a pre-playing “meet” to see who wants to shag who.
I’m not knocking that, I’m just saying that there should be a difference in the terminology and postings.
In the worst case scenario (for me) I wouldn’t want to go to the “trouble” of driving 20 or 30 miles for a social to find that after an hour, people start thinning out to go off shagging.
----------------------------------------------------------
On reflection – I actually think we could do with a site sanctioned definition of all three “Social Gatherings” in the terminology sections. At least that way, people would have both a yard stick, and a reference point.
I would also ask that people organising “chatroom style get-togethers” title their threads as such. And as meetings/meets rather than “Socials”
But please - overall – I am NOT wanting to have or start, a “Them and Us” situation.
Discuss bolt
Mal
Mod
Am I missing something here???? :shock:
Unknown User
Quote by Mal
Am I missing something here???? :shock:

This bit . . . .
Quote by dambuster
I don't want to divert or hijack this particular thread any further, . . . .
Mal
Mod
Quote by dambuster
Am I missing something here???? :shock:

This bit . . . .
Quote by dambuster
I don't want to divert or hijack this particular thread any further, . . . .

Perhaps you could stay on track and answer the question then.
Unknown User
Mal, you've quoted a question that I may not have answered, but believe I have responded to, and said why I don't want to answer it at this time. Other than that, I'm not sure which question you are pushing for an answer to.
Mal
Mod
Quote by dambuster
Mal, you've quoted a question that I may not have answered, but believe I have responded to, and said why I don't want to answer it at this time. Other than that, I'm not sure which question you are pushing for an answer to.

Quote by Mal

And having seen the appalling treatment, and "clever" editing after being locked dished out to mike48 in his suggestions thread, I'm reluctant.

What 'clever' editing would that be? you're making out that that thread was manipulated after locking by moderators, which it wasn't. the only 'clever edit' as you so called it was the removal of my last post as Mike felt he was big enough to make his own defence.
Mal
This one. I don't seem to see any 'response' to it and I fail to see why you are prepared to level accusations and then decide it's not a good time to reply.
Unknown User
Quote by Mal
What 'clever' editing would that be? you're making out that that thread was manipulated after locking by moderators, which it wasn't. the only 'clever edit' as you so called it was the removal of my last post as Mike felt he was big enough to make his own defence.
Mal

Quote by Mal
This one. I don't seem to see any 'response' to it and I fail to see why you are prepared to level accusations and then decide it's not a good time to reply.

In plain English . . . .
My 'response' to that question was the part about not wanting to divert or hijack this thread. In my 'response' I also included the reason why I didn't want to answer the question at this time.
I feel this exchange between you and I is having no input to the discussion about Socials and I am therefore not going to feed that "exchange" further in this thread.
Mal
Mod
Quote by dambuster

What 'clever' editing would that be? you're making out that that thread was manipulated after locking by moderators, which it wasn't. the only 'clever edit' as you so called it was the removal of my last post as Mike felt he was big enough to make his own defence.
Mal

Quote by Mal
This one. I don't seem to see any 'response' to it and I fail to see why you are prepared to level accusations and then decide it's not a good time to reply.

In plain English . . . .
My 'response' to that question was the part about not wanting to divert or hijack this thread. In my 'response' I also included the reason why I didn't want to answer the question at this time.
I feel this exchange between you and I is having no input to the discussion about Socials and I am therefore not going to feed that "exchange" further in this thread.
In plain English also
Then perhaps if you would have the decency to explain your comments this wouldn't have had to be dragged out for so long. It only detracts from this thread because YOU posted it in here, not me. All I've ever asked you to do is explain your accusation, which you seem to have skirted round at every opportunity. Is that too much to ask? If it was the right time to make that accusation, it should be the right time to back it up.
HornyLittleBlonde
Sex God
May I make a suggestion that this exchange be moved into a separate thread?
That way this topic can be discussed, whilst leaving the original thread topic to continue? Dunno:
Darkfire
Sex God
Ahem :dry: I have a high horse to get back on, when you two have quite finished lol
Mal
Mod
We don't have a button for that, HLB - and anyways, it's likely that I would be accused of abusing my position if I was to do that.
Unknown User
So . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Socials ?
Should they be defined ?
HornyLittleBlonde
Sex God
Quote by Mal
We don't have a button for that, HLB - and anyways, it's likely that I would be accused of abusing my position if I was to do that.

I'd assumed that as you have the ability to move posts into different forums and threads that you had the ability to move them into a new one.
If that's not the case I suppose I could start a new thread and you could then move the posts into it.
I don't see how moving it would in anyway implicate you as abusing your position. As long as the posts remain in tact in their original unedited state dunno
Mal
Mod
This has gone on all afternoon. If you don't want it to detract from your thread, you have the option to PM.
essex34m
Sex God
Quote by Darkfire
Ahem :dry: I have a high horse to get back on, when you two have quite finished lol

im just off to B&Q to get you a stepladder dear
Sarah
Sex God
Quote by essex34m
Ahem :dry: I have a high horse to get back on, when you two have quite finished lol

im just off to B&Q to get you a stepladder dear
You mean you are not offering to give her a 'bunk up'!!
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Mal
Mod
Quote by HornyLittleBlonde
We don't have a button for that, HLB - and anyways, it's likely that I would be accused of abusing my position if I was to do that.

I'd assumed that as you have the ability to move posts into different forums and threads that you had the ability to move them into a new one.
If that's not the case I suppose I could start a new thread and you could then move the posts into it.
I don't see how moving it would in anyway implicate you as abusing your position. As long as the posts remain in tact in their original unedited state dunno
We can move whole threads from one forum to another and we can merge a thread into another, but we can't split posts out of a thread and place them elsewhere. We used to but cannot at the moment.
I don't see how moving it would in anyway implicate you as abusing your position.

You would be surprised what people consider an abuse of position these days.
Unknown User
STOP FFS - you're both much bigger than this mad
Unknown User
Quote by Bloke2005
STOP FFS - you're both much bigger than this mad

redface
You're right, of course.
HornyLittleBlonde
Sex God
Quote by Mal
We can move whole threads from one forum to another and we can merge a thread into another, but we can't split posts out of a thread and place them elsewhere. We used to but cannot at the moment.

Thanks for the clarification :thumbup:
Quote by Mal
You would be surprised what people consider an abuse of position these days.

Really?
I haven't seen any evidence of that. confused
I think members of this site have a good understanding of that.
Mal
Mod
Quote by dambuster
STOP FFS - you're both much bigger than this mad

redface
You're right, of course.
does that mean I'll get an answer somewhere?
Unknown User
Quote by Mal
does that mean I'll get an answer somewhere?

Yep . . .
Quote by dambuster
So . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Socials ?
Should they be defined ?
Sarah
Sex God
Dambuster and Mal
Ffs please do as bloke says and stop this.
You know I think the world of both of you, but in very different ways.
This thread http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/swingers-forum/viewtopic/82604.html.
Mike 48 asked Mal (by pm) to removed his last comment (which he did) as Mike48 says / feels he is big enough to deal with it.
I'm sure Mike48 can start a new thread as to why he asked Mal to remove his comments, and to add any other comment he feels he needs to add.
Having re read that thread, I cannot see what else has been altered, except Mal removerd his last post and put back what he originally wrote when he was locking it.
:rose:
Now please both of you, either post what ever you feel has been altered, or go to pm.
Mal
Mod
Actually, you're right.
I don't need an answer.
not now. Not ever.
Dammy's responses have spoken volumes of the sort of guy he is. I shall say no more on this subject and let it get back to whatever it was before.
Mal
wink
Unknown User
Quote by Sarah
Dambuster and Mal
Ffs please do as bloke says and stop this.
You know I think the world of both of you, but in very different ways.

Thank you Sarah... that's kinda what I was trying to say and I've contained myself, trying to find the words just about all afternoon but enough is enough FFS confused
I've met you both and think you're both great guys. I mean that, I'm NOT taking the piss biggrin
It's actually people you that made this site what it was and still is and through thick and thin stuck with it (well almost, but you did come back ;)) It's equally people like you that can throw the dynamic that we all enjoy completely off-balance. Nobody is indispensible but there are some personalities here that make this place fun - you are two of them so please don't ever lose sight of that - for better and for worse.... cool
Now put down your handbags, kiss and do whatever you blokies need to do or my double-ender is coming out :rascal:
HornyLittleBlonde
Sex God
Quote by Sarah
Mike 48 asked Mal (by pm) to removed his last comment (which he did) as Mike48 says / feels he is big enough to deal with it.

Partially right.
But if we're going to post the truth, let's print the whole truth.
When Mike realised that the imformation given to him wasn't from this site, he wanted to put his own explanation in the thread.
Mal discouraged him from doing that and said it would be better if he did it. And he did.
The post was later removed by Mal, but the thread was still locked meaning Mike couldn't put his own explanation in.
Mike asked that he be allowed to put his own explanation in. Mal refused.
The thread is now left looking like Mike deliberately lied, which is incorrect.
Quote by Sarah
I'm sure Mike48 can start a new thread as to why he asked Mal to remove his comments, and to add any other comment he feels he needs to add.

And starting a thread on the back of a locked thread?
cockslut
Sex God
is it correct to assume then, with S.H. rules covering socials nothing untoward as actually / physically happened to any one at a social. which may suggest there rules are adequate, or are some are looking forward and seeking potential problems by arranging a social thats advertised in both the forum chatroom and photo ads, thus inviting all members of s.h. which some feel have diferent attitudes to recreational sex dependant which medium they use ?
also there was a forum running last week seeking mentors for newbies, surely if these mentors have differing views, people will get differing views on what socials are etc. they may even scare them to death with supposedly unsafe gatherings they may never progress further along this path, so i agree black & white rules are needed,however to write a statement for nearly 1/2 million people who need to understand would be very difficult.