And says! ooooooooooooo no it isent!
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Verification
Sex God
Quote by Steve_D
This is the last time I am going to post on this thread as I am sick and tired of the petty whinging from people who don't even use the fucking chatroom.
The following are my personal thoughts and are not intended to represent either SH or the other chatroom ops.
The main mistake that I can see is that we have given a written definition for the barrack room lawyers to rip apart. In my mind the + was to show that people are genuine. It wasn't there to show that you had shagged someone but by the same coin, people that have said, either here or in the chatroom, "I'm not a swinger, I'm only here to chat" didn't qualify.
You'll note that the "Guidelines" are called exactly that. People are expected to use a little common sense, is that so difficult?
The reason the admin is kept anonymous is to prevent them becomming the subject of harrassment. Repeated calls for them to "show their face" will do no good. As Jon has already stated, the ops actually attach the + sign, but only on instructions from the scheme admin.
This scheme was voted for by a healthy majority of the chatroom ops. One of the comments was "Lets give the genuine ones a visa". This was the intention.
Nobody has said that the first tranche of +'s was perfect, what has been said, over and over again, is that shagging an op won't get you a +. So for somebody to come in the room and ask which op they shagged was asking to get kicked IMO.
I've also seen numerous references to "democracy"
This site belongs to one man, he is advised by the chatroom ops on the running of the chatroom, and the site moderators on the running of the forum and ads. Does that look like a democracy? If it was, well the majority of site users are single male wannafucks, should we let them run the site?
Steve
Well, well.... seems that this is the best explanation we are going to get!
The system was voted for by a healthy majority of chat room ops.... so you're saying that not ALL ops agreed with it in the first place? And no, SH is not a democracy, but it is nothing without the people that use it, and when a system so downright cheap and nasty has been set up, don't you think those users have rights to ask questions? But..... no questions are to be answered.... the room users have to accept this or what? Go elsewhere?
I was on the room yesterday when lucyslovely asked why she was + ed and I saw what happened. So.... not only are people not to ask questions, they are going to be punished for doing so! And the supporters of this system are saying that it is in place for the good of the site? So... who is the site exactly? Its users or the few who think they are in charge?
The reason why your definition has been scrutinised is cos it's bullshit. Period. You have assumed that people are going to roll over and accept what has been given to them. People on SH are more intelligent than that. The most disgusting thing about this is that people's trust in others has been eroded and any attempt to ask why has been met with arrogance and language that borders on abusive. Angry mob? Too right.... and you wonder why?
The admin people could log on to the forum anonymously and answer these questions, no problem. But they have chosen not to. WHY?????
I echo Neil's sentiments regarding the site generally which is why I haven't contributed to the Forum recently and beyond this thread, I don't intend to.
The topic of this thread was brought to my attention shortly after being instigated and tbh I'm not remotely surprised this has happened.
All the past Them and Us/ clique/ in-crowd/ elite squad/ mafia 'discussions' have now been confirmed by this ridiculous scheme.
There are far too many unanswered questions which could have easily been dealt with by the holier than thou hiding behind their self-imposed anonymity. I just imagine a group of power-happy mods, heads together comparing notes on who's shagged who. It's a bit sick really, isn't it?
Oh - sorry forgive me, you don't have to have shagged someone, just met them - but not at a party or a Munch and it must be with intent but you don't have to play as long as you intended to ..... here we go again!
At the time of writing, there have been 61 people contribute to this thread. (I am counting the couples names as one). 34 of those names are known to me personally as having used the chatroom - ie: I've seen them in there! 27 have not. So that blows Wishmaster's comment that the people that use the Forum are not the same people that use the chatroom right out the water.
Furthermore, what difference does it make whether the contributors use the chatroom or not - are they not entitled to an opinion? I've never been spit-roasted but I can have an opinion on it, can't I? I've never voted for the BNP but I can have an opinion on that, surely? Or are we back to the "you're not a part of it, you're not coming in" elite, in-crowd bollox again.
When I first joined the chatroom some 7 months ago and then not long after, the Forum, I was fully conscious of the cliquey atmosphere that reigns and this whole verification thing just supports that. You can argue that cliqueness can be found on any site, at work, school etc - doesn't make it right though does it???
I don't expect a "+" nor want one. I'm not a player, though i have played in the past, but I don't want the title or the status or the "so who did you shag to get the +?" question or the knowledge that SH Mafia have had discussions about my private life that go beyond idle gossip (and we all know about that). In fact, I'm in a very similar situation as Angel Chat. I'd be interested to know how she got her "+" and I didn't?
Not expecting any answers. i think those against the scheme are fighting a losing battle. Those in power have spoken(or not, as the case may be) and unless you all do something drastic like totally sabotage the chatroom, nothing will change. They can and will do whatever they want. Rules are made and broken depending on whether your face fits or not and if it serves the button-pushers to allow it. It's happened to me, it's happened to others that i know of and it will continue to happen unless you DO something. Talk is cheap. If you're that bothered, then fight it.
End of rant. Bring it on!
The topic of this thread was brought to my attention shortly after being instigated and tbh I'm not remotely surprised this has happened.
All the past Them and Us/ clique/ in-crowd/ elite squad/ mafia 'discussions' have now been confirmed by this ridiculous scheme.
There are far too many unanswered questions which could have easily been dealt with by the holier than thou hiding behind their self-imposed anonymity. I just imagine a group of power-happy mods, heads together comparing notes on who's shagged who. It's a bit sick really, isn't it?
Oh - sorry forgive me, you don't have to have shagged someone, just met them - but not at a party or a Munch and it must be with intent but you don't have to play as long as you intended to ..... here we go again!
At the time of writing, there have been 61 people contribute to this thread. (I am counting the couples names as one). 34 of those names are known to me personally as having used the chatroom - ie: I've seen them in there! 27 have not. So that blows Wishmaster's comment that the people that use the Forum are not the same people that use the chatroom right out the water.
Furthermore, what difference does it make whether the contributors use the chatroom or not - are they not entitled to an opinion? I've never been spit-roasted but I can have an opinion on it, can't I? I've never voted for the BNP but I can have an opinion on that, surely? Or are we back to the "you're not a part of it, you're not coming in" elite, in-crowd bollox again.
When I first joined the chatroom some 7 months ago and then not long after, the Forum, I was fully conscious of the cliquey atmosphere that reigns and this whole verification thing just supports that. You can argue that cliqueness can be found on any site, at work, school etc - doesn't make it right though does it???
I don't expect a "+" nor want one. I'm not a player, though i have played in the past, but I don't want the title or the status or the "so who did you shag to get the +?" question or the knowledge that SH Mafia have had discussions about my private life that go beyond idle gossip (and we all know about that). In fact, I'm in a very similar situation as Angel Chat. I'd be interested to know how she got her "+" and I didn't?
Not expecting any answers. i think those against the scheme are fighting a losing battle. Those in power have spoken(or not, as the case may be) and unless you all do something drastic like totally sabotage the chatroom, nothing will change. They can and will do whatever they want. Rules are made and broken depending on whether your face fits or not and if it serves the button-pushers to allow it. It's happened to me, it's happened to others that i know of and it will continue to happen unless you DO something. Talk is cheap. If you're that bothered, then fight it.
End of rant. Bring it on!
To be honest, Marya, I'm not sure I can see the cliquey atmosphere in the forum that you and other people have complained about, but if I've ever done anything to further it, I apologise. (And if I have, for God's sake please someone drop me a PM so I can know not to repeat the same mistakes in the future!!! :!: )
Sex God
Quote by Marya
I just imagine a group of power-happy mods, heads together comparing notes on who's shagged who. It's a bit sick really, isn't it?
Not expecting any answers. i think those against the scheme are fighting a losing battle.
Yes, it is sick.... sick, cheap and nasty...... everything that swinging should not be.
Yes, we are fighting a losing battle, the powers have decided and that is that. But time will tell, but unfortunately swinging heaven suffers in the meantime by losing more genuine members. But the debates on here have been eloquent and clear - at least on one side. Let's leave it up to everyone who comes across this thread in future to draw their own conclusions, shall we.
Quote by roger743
To be honest, Marya, I'm not sure I can see the cliquey atmosphere in the forum that you and other people have complained about, but if I've ever done anything to further it, I apologise. (And if I have, for God's sake please someone drop me a PM so I can know not to repeat the same mistakes in the future!!! :!: )
It wasn't a complant as such, just an observation. i don't care that much tbh, but I know others do and that's when there has been upset and frustration among the members. I guess what i was trying to point out (not quite as eloquently as others have done before me) that this verification scheme will only serve to divide the members even more than they already are, which creates even more upset and frustration ... blah blah.
It's not something that concerns me personally but while i'm stil allowed to have an opinion, I will voice it.
PM on it's way, Roger. A nice one!
Quote by Marya
At the time of writing, there have been 61 people contribute to this thread. (I am counting the couples names as one). 34 of those names are known to me personally as having used the chatroom - ie: I've seen them in there! 27 have not. So that blows Wishmaster's comment that the people that use the Forum are not the same people that use the chatroom right out the water.
Aw Marya hon how could you!.... It was not me who said that but Mister_Discreet.
But you're forgiven coz ur so fecking gorgeous... hehehe!
Nice ta see ya back, I hope you continue to post here.
Luvs Wishmaster.
Quote by Wishmaster
At the time of writing, there have been 61 people contribute to this thread. (I am counting the couples names as one). 34 of those names are known to me personally as having used the chatroom - ie: I've seen them in there! 27 have not. So that blows Wishmaster's comment that the people that use the Forum are not the same people that use the chatroom right out the water.
Aw Marya hon how could you!.... It was not me who said that but Mister_Discreet.
But you're forgiven coz ur so fecking gorgeous... hehehe!
Nice ta see ya back, I hope you continue to post here.
Luvs Wishmaster.
Well, then I apologise.
I'm not back - not really. I heard about this verification thing and just couldn't keep my nose out. I've held back for 17 pages but when i've got something to say, I just have to say it.
There you have 3 of the reasons why I won't bother with SH much now - the whole sicky cliquey thing that allows one group to assume status over another, the powers-that-be makinjg up the rules as they go along (btw, the suggestion that the definitions for verification may change over time was bluddy hilarious - how do you lot get away with it???) and the fact i can't keep my gob shut.
Marya Hon ..... it ain't my site and I really don't give a toss about which system is imposed. I'm a bohemian by nature and one set of rules is just a shitty as another set so I simply go about my own business in my own way and let the world worry itself to death if it wants to. But I'm a nosey git too who can't keep his gob shut - fancy shouting off together sometime... 
Wishmaster.
Wishmaster.
hmmm .... so this system does have it's ++ then .......... hehehe ......... I knew it would work!!!
Back to light hearted banter and let the world go blow itself up if it wants to!
Animal rights and peace!!! Up the revolution! ......... Down with the aristos!
I'm gonna hijack this thread now..... try and stop me if ya can!
Wishmaster ... aka .... sex maniac swinger type class 4
Back to light hearted banter and let the world go blow itself up if it wants to!
Animal rights and peace!!! Up the revolution! ......... Down with the aristos!
I'm gonna hijack this thread now..... try and stop me if ya can!
Wishmaster ... aka .... sex maniac swinger type class 4
Hijack!!!
Is it ok for my 7y/o daughter to paint false spectacles on her grandad's face while he's asleep in the armchair after Xmas Dinner
Her pressie list depends on the answers you give here...
------------------------------------------------------
Wishmaster.... aka ... sex maniac type swinger class 4
Is it ok for my 7y/o daughter to paint false spectacles on her grandad's face while he's asleep in the armchair after Xmas Dinner
Her pressie list depends on the answers you give here...
------------------------------------------------------
Wishmaster.... aka ... sex maniac type swinger class 4
Quote by marmalaid
No doubt the answer has got to be a resounding YES.
The only thing to think about is that you may say "If grandad wakes suddenly and moves his head you may poke him in the eyes, so an adult had better do it sweet little child-o-mine.!
Very good point marmalaid (got the name right this time hehehe) I'm glad u pointed that out to the boys and girls watching at home.... (assumes Blue Peter patronising voice)
Now children, make sure an adult is present when you draw on grandad's face in case he wakes up unexpectedly and you are left holding the blame and cop the whack for it.
absolutely staggered beyong belief! :shock: :shock: :shock:
right. let's get this absolutely clear steve_d!
the function of a chatroom OP, is to enforce the AUP, and ensure the responsible use of the room! nothing more! OPS are mere members of this site, who have volunteered to do that. so as mere members, why is their opinion, or their rights, of more weight than that of other members who have argued forcefully against this.
so the OPS ((( some of them ))) voted for it? well who gave you the right to take that upon yourself? a handful of you ASSUMED that right. which is precisely the point of those who have argued so forcefully, out of real passion, on this thread!
we are arguing not on "teething problems". we are arguing out of real conviction that it is simply plain wrong for members to have their sex lives subject to scrutiny so that a handful of anonymous other members can say whether or not they are a genuine member of this site!
i do not accept, that anyone, be they OP or not, has the right to pass judgement on others here. nowhere have you put forward any valid reasons why this is either necessary or desirable or even remotely useful. there are lots of negatives that lots of users, many of them yer ACTUAL chatroom user, have expressed here. so lets not just dismiss the argument out of hand with yet more put downs eh?
it serves no purpose, it is unclear, it is confusing, it does not serve to denote genuine swingers. it simply serves to denote people who in your opinion, are not genuine, because they don't know who you know. that's it!
neil x x x ;)
right. let's get this absolutely clear steve_d!
the function of a chatroom OP, is to enforce the AUP, and ensure the responsible use of the room! nothing more! OPS are mere members of this site, who have volunteered to do that. so as mere members, why is their opinion, or their rights, of more weight than that of other members who have argued forcefully against this.
so the OPS ((( some of them ))) voted for it? well who gave you the right to take that upon yourself? a handful of you ASSUMED that right. which is precisely the point of those who have argued so forcefully, out of real passion, on this thread!
we are arguing not on "teething problems". we are arguing out of real conviction that it is simply plain wrong for members to have their sex lives subject to scrutiny so that a handful of anonymous other members can say whether or not they are a genuine member of this site!
i do not accept, that anyone, be they OP or not, has the right to pass judgement on others here. nowhere have you put forward any valid reasons why this is either necessary or desirable or even remotely useful. there are lots of negatives that lots of users, many of them yer ACTUAL chatroom user, have expressed here. so lets not just dismiss the argument out of hand with yet more put downs eh?
it serves no purpose, it is unclear, it is confusing, it does not serve to denote genuine swingers. it simply serves to denote people who in your opinion, are not genuine, because they don't know who you know. that's it!
neil x x x ;)
Quote by Wishmaster
shave grandads eyebrows off i say.................... :twisted:
Another very pertinent point from redstilletto.... shave the eybrows so that she gets a consistent circle around the eyes.... well thought out that one..... which type of razor should I .... er..... she use?
a nice old blunt bic one so it takes a few chunks out ...........
Sex God
Quote by Mister_Discreet
Sticking to factual corrections as promised....
I find it incredibly insulting that I have to send an email to be "branded" genuine
You don't have to send an e-mail. Someone else has to send it, you can't verify yourself.
Quote by little gem
What happens if two people get together and "cook up" a ficticious meet. Who would know if they didn't tell?
Only verified users can verify others, so 2 non-verified people can't achieve anything by cooking up a ficticious meet.
As for two non-verified people, I didn't say two non-verified people did I? I said 2 people. My mates on here could easily give me a + withut me having to even lift a finger. that was my point, how genuine is genuine?
I find insulting that someone else has to email someone with the details of my private life Mr_D.
Why should I have to tell anyone what I have been up to? I don't! It is my business
I don't want to go to a party and find there have been people emailing each other behind the scenes saying
"OOooooo you know that little gem, you'll never guess what she did............"
I am not here for the entertainment of other people, I am here to swing. What I do or do not do is nothing to do with anyone but the people I am involved with and I for one don't want details of anything I do leaving the scene of that meet without my permission
Quote by redstilletto
shave grandads eyebrows off i say.................... :twisted:
Another very pertinent point from redstilletto.... shave the eybrows so that she gets a consistent circle around the eyes.... well thought out that one..... which type of razor should I .... er..... she use?
a nice old blunt bic one so it takes a few chunks out ...........
But that would wake him up screaming in agony and the massive blood loss would make the felt tip pen ink run...... wouldn't it? And ruin my fecking carpet .... dinner is round my house this year!
But that would wake him up screaming in agony and the massive blood loss would make the felt tip pen ink run...... wouldn't it? And ruin my fecking carpet .... dinner is round my house this year!
use permenant marker pen..........mr wish
make grandad run round in big circles nice red pattern on boreing old beige carpet
o dinner what we haveing :twisted:
use permenant marker pen..........mr wish
make grandad run round in big circles nice red pattern on boreing old beige carpet
o dinner what we haveing :twisted:
Quote by redstilletto
But that would wake him up screaming in agony and the massive blood loss would make the felt tip pen ink run...... wouldn't it? And ruin my fecking carpet .... dinner is round my house this year!
use permenant marker pen..........mr wish
make grandad run round in big circles nice red pattern on boreing old beige carpet
o dinner what we haveing :twisted:
Hmmm two birds with one stone right? I must confess to needing a revamped carpet in my living room!... Thanks for that.
BTW... Dinner is Xmas Traditional... u know, Turkey with all the trimmings and.... + ... er... u get stuffing too! Just u wait till I feast me 'Mince Pies' on ya!
Sex God
Quote by little gem
I find insulting that someone else has to email someone with the details of my private life Mr_D.
Why should I have to tell anyone what I have been up to? I don't! It is my business
I don't want to go to a party and find there have been people emailing each other behind the scenes saying
"OOooooo you know that little gem, you'll never guess what she did............"
I am not here for the entertainment of other people, I am here to swing. What I do or do not do is nothing to do with anyone but the people I am involved with and I for one don't want details of anything I do leaving the scene of that meet without my permission
I absolutely 100% agree. The sick part of this system is that people are invited to gossip behind each others backs - that is inbuilt into the system, there is no getting around it. Jeeeez, would I get verified if one of the chat room ops happened to drive through Bolton one day and happen to see my blowing some geezer in a layby?????? How sick is that?
Take my last party as an example...... A LOT went on that night...... a lot was said about it, but the details of who did what to who were NOT disclosed - only when people were OK with that info being published. The pictures that were shown to people by myself and by others were ALL OKed by the people on them. Consent throughout the whole process was absolutely respected at every level. That is what swinging is about. It is through getting to know people that you know whether they are genuine, not by some system that has been imposed by a few individuals.
I meet a lot of people at clubs. Do I say what I see them doing and with who I see them doing it with? No. Yet it seems that's what some people have been doing - and inaccurately too in at least one case! Which ever way you look at it IT IS WRONG!
I was against this system from the start, but I was open minded. I know that verification on the forum has been discussed by the members - IN THE OPEN - and has been discarded as being stupid. I was open to the possibility that the chat room might be different and that it might help on there. However, everything that I have heard about this system has been utter rubbish. It appears that people on the chat room neither requested nor want the system, who some are now accepting it cos there is no other choice.. that the definition of a player is total bullshit, and that the whole thing has been dreamed up behind the scenes, and didn't even have the support of all the ops! What confidence does that instill????
Anyway, that's enough from me - til later
Sex God
It seems to me like a whole load of guess work where people make assumptions about who is "active" and who is not. It feels like high school all over again trying to work out has lost their virginity and who hasn't.
You really don't need to guess who plays or doesn't, you just use the list from Blue's birthday party and there are at least 20 people verified in one fell swoop! ;)
I don't see why assumption should be made about anyone here. As quite a few people have already said, this comment is particularly prevalent.
where people make assumptions about who is "active" and who is not. It feels like high school all over again trying to work out has lost their virginity and who hasn't.You really don't need to guess who plays or doesn't, you just use the list from Blue's birthday party and there are at least 20 people verified in one fell swoop! ;)
I don't see why assumption should be made about anyone here. As quite a few people have already said, this comment is particularly prevalent.
Quote by Bluexxx
Take my last party as an example...... A LOT went on that night...... a lot was said about it, but the details of who did what to who were NOT disclosed - only when people were OK with that info being published. The pictures that were shown to people by myself and by others were ALL OKed by the people on them. Consent throughout the whole process was absolutely respected at every level. That is what swinging is about. It is through getting to know people that you know whether they are genuine, not by some system that has been imposed by a few individuals.
Quote by JudyTV
I'm confused Neil - i thought you left because of the arguing, but you've come back to join in the arguing
Being a free fair and open forum that is his choice, as is yours too. No one has the right to deny him that or to condemn him for his return or his input.
personally I say welcome back and post away..... to all.
Judy
Thats a little harsh Judy, to be fair, i was just saying that i am confused - perhaps i misunderstood Neils orignal reasons, or have been too hasty in making my opinion? I absolutely was not condeming or denying Neil anything (as i'm sure he knows!) Usually you are so perceptive on the forum i hope its not a change from Judy TV to 2D TV.
Sex God
Quote by Elissamay
I'm confused Neil - i thought you left because of the arguing, but you've come back to join in the arguing
Being a free fair and open forum that is his choice, as is yours too. No one has the right to deny him that or to condemn him for his return or his input.
personally I say welcome back and post away..... to all.
Judy
Thats a little harsh Judy, to be fair, i was just saying that i am confused - perhaps i misunderstood Neils orignal reasons, or have been too hasty in making my opinion? I absolutely was not condeming or denying Neil anything (as i'm sure he knows!) Usually you are so perceptive on the forum i hope its not a change from Judy TV to 2D TV.
This is exactly what the complaints about this system are about.
Behind the computer screen people don't know what is going on really. The reasons why we are here, why some choose to leave and who plays with who, are private. we tell each other on here what we want people to know.
What happened to the right of privacy?
I personally find your TV comments inappropriate to this arguement and quite offensive.
Quote by little gem
I'm confused Neil - i thought you left because of the arguing, but you've come back to join in the arguing
Being a free fair and open forum that is his choice, as is yours too. No one has the right to deny him that or to condemn him for his return or his input.
personally I say welcome back and post away..... to all.
Judy
Thats a little harsh Judy, to be fair, i was just saying that i am confused - perhaps i misunderstood Neils orignal reasons, or have been too hasty in making my opinion? I absolutely was not condeming or denying Neil anything (as i'm sure he knows!) Usually you are so perceptive on the forum i hope its not a change from Judy TV to 2D TV.
This is exactly what the complaints about this system are about.
Behind the computer screen people don't know what is going on really. The reasons why we are here, why some choose to leave and who plays with who, are private. we tell each other on here what we want people to know.
What happened to the right of privacy?
I personally find your TV comments inappropriate to this arguement and quite offensive.
Well i wasn't being offensive - 2dtv is a satirical/piss taking tv programme and is referring to Judy assuming i am being horrible - which seems to be the case everytime i post something on here, it is assumed as rude or 'secretly' rude which is crazy...and a little upsetting.
(edited to add - i'm sure this is unecessary however, just incase there is confusion '2d' can be used to refer to someone having only one perspective.)
Quote by roger743
To be honest, Marya, I'm not sure I can see the cliquey atmosphere in the forum that you and other people have complained about, but if I've ever done anything to further it, I apologise. (And if I have, for God's sake please someone drop me a PM so I can know not to repeat the same mistakes in the future!!! :!: )
I'd have to agree that, to me, the forum doesn't seem overly cliquey.
I'm a n00b and a single male, two good reasons for the forum at large to ignore me.
Sure, I've made a couple of posts directed at individuals than have seemingly been ignored, but that's just how forum conversations go.
Folk here seem open and friendly enough, I like it here, I don't really see any problem in the forum, and I've been in some pretty clique heavy forums in my time and bailed on them for never being accepted into them.
People seem to be focusing far too much on the small negative posts when the majority is still friendly and positive.
OK, so this post is off at a tangent from the chat room issue, but it didn't seem worth branching off into a new thread.
Quote by Steve_D
This is the last time I am going to post on this thread as I am sick and tired of the petty whinging from people who don't even use the fucking chatroom.
Can I just point out (with as much respect as I can portray in a forum) that you rarely post on the forum and yet started one of the most inflammatory posts about what people should and should do on the forum (re flouncing).
As far as I am aware very few people accused you of not being entitled to an opinion because you rarely use the forum, in fact there were more people defending your right to have that opinion.
Please can you afford the same people who defended your right, the right to pass comment on this system. Whilst people may not use the chatroom now, they may in the future and should be aware of the system and how it works.
I'm not saying this to start an argument or resurrect past ones ... I do think that some people have defended the right to have the system admirably, whilst not having any ownership of it.
MODS: if I have overstepped the mark here by saying this please pm me and I will edit the post.
