Naughty blue!
Sex God
Bluexxx
Naughty blue!
Naughty blue!
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Verification
:rotflmao: Sex God
:doh:
I've been caught again!
I've been caught again!
Sex God
Quote by little gem
:doh:
I've been caught again!
And you're STILL not verified...... you must have been caught by the wrong people, obviously
Sex God
I'm not sure that movie was good enough, maybe i'd have to make another one? Any volunteers? ;) :twisted:
Sex God
Quote by LoverOfOlderLadies
Sounds like a bloody good Idea to me.. Im in Herts... who is my local Verifier ;-)
Do you have to take a test???
Cause im thinking that might be the only sort of test I'd look forward to :-)
Sean
If you are known to have shagged one of the chat room ops or their friends you can be verified. If you don't know any of these people, you just have to hope that one of the verified people will take pity on you and shag you - then you can be verified..... I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.....
Hey.... little gem..... is making a movie another one of your fantasies ? :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: .... Maybe you can send your movie into the verification panel as "evidence"!!!!!
:lol: :lol: :lol: Sex God
Quote by bluexxx
Hey.... little gem..... is making a movie another one of your fantasies ? :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: .... Maybe you can send your movie into the verification panel as "evidence"!!!!!
How indiscreet of you to think of such a thing! :shock:
I am appalled.....
*puts copy of video into the panel for scrutiny and includes all names and faces so they can be verified at the same time too
Sex God
Quote by LoverOfOlderLadies
I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.....
:cry: :cry:
Not sure whether to take that as a personal insult, or if you don't approve of the verification system
:cry:
Sean
Certainly nothing personal Sean..... I disapprove of the system cos it means that single guys such as yourself are going to find it even more difficult to get sex....... but hey what do I know
:roll: :roll: :roll: If you can be at all bothered read this thread and see what a load of tripe it really is.......
Or draw your own conclusions of course!
I have just had a brief Precised look through the thread and in hindsight I do agree with you entirely Blue.
Although in truth I don't think the verification system will make a lot of difference to the sexual activity on the site. for two reasons.
Firstly, In my opinon what attracts people to one another on the forum's is their personalities, when you get to know somebody well from on here you already know that they are either an active swinger, or certainly interested in becoming one, and therefore what difference does verification make.. If I may be allowed to make an example, If I were to meet someone on here that I really got on with, and found attractive, the fact that they had a little + sign next to their name would make no difference to whether I would approach them with the possibility of a meet or not.
Secondly, the other source of action for many people on here are the photo Ad's I personally am not one to go that route, as I feel there has to be some kind of ... "Friendship" between two people to make swinging that little bit better, each to their own so those that are regular users of the service please do not be offended. Obviously these advertisers/trollers will not be affected by the system, so really what is it going to do???
Feel free to point out any faults in my thinking, I really enjoy a good debate ;-)
Sean
Although in truth I don't think the verification system will make a lot of difference to the sexual activity on the site. for two reasons.
Firstly, In my opinon what attracts people to one another on the forum's is their personalities, when you get to know somebody well from on here you already know that they are either an active swinger, or certainly interested in becoming one, and therefore what difference does verification make.. If I may be allowed to make an example, If I were to meet someone on here that I really got on with, and found attractive, the fact that they had a little + sign next to their name would make no difference to whether I would approach them with the possibility of a meet or not.
Secondly, the other source of action for many people on here are the photo Ad's I personally am not one to go that route, as I feel there has to be some kind of ... "Friendship" between two people to make swinging that little bit better, each to their own so those that are regular users of the service please do not be offended. Obviously these advertisers/trollers will not be affected by the system, so really what is it going to do???
Feel free to point out any faults in my thinking, I really enjoy a good debate ;-)
Sean
Sex God
Quote by JudyTV
quote]
How indiscreet of you to think of such a thing! :shock:
I am appalled.....
*puts copy of video into the panel for scrutiny and includes all names and faces so they can be verified at the same time too
Oh shit, no, no not the video, please dont show the video.
Judy
I've got a good idea.... how about mass verification?????
At Satin's party all we need to do is broadcast the whole night to the ops via web cam. That's 40 or so verifications all in one fell swoop....... Then once I'm verified I can also verifiy shit loads of geezers - no idea who they are or whether they're total wankers or not, but it's all within the rules - soon there'll be no one left unverified!
What a great idea!
:grin:
Quote by LoverOfOlderLadies
Firstly, In my opinon what attracts people to one another on the forum's is their personalities, when you get to know somebody well from on here you already know that they are either an active swinger, or certainly interested in becoming one, and therefore what difference does verification make.
You're making an assumption. There are people here who are not active on the swinging scene.
Edit: acutally, that's debatable. By getting to know someone I guess you are able to determine whether that are active, looking to become active, or not active.
So ignore me, I'm talking bollox.
Sex God
Quote by LoverOfOlderLadies
Firstly, In my opinon what attracts people to one another on the forum's is their personalities, when you get to know somebody well from on here you already know that they are either an active swinger, or certainly interested in becoming one, and therefore what difference does verification make.. If I may be allowed to make an example, If I were to meet someone on here that I really got on with, and found attractive, the fact that they had a little + sign next to their name would make no difference to whether I would approach them with the possibility of a meet or not.
Exactly what others have said.... everyone on here is a grown up so they make up their own minds.... we don't need +'s at all.................
It's all bollox, it is!
Sex God
Quote by zootle
I disapprove of the system cos it means that single guys such as yourself are going to find it even more difficult to get sex.
On the one hand she's scary, but on the other she's a champion of single guys.
(runs for cover)
I love single guys, especially when they let me watch :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
Sex God
Quote by LoverOfOlderLadiesWonders, in a very frightened way, what Blue wants to watch the single guys do
Sean
Shag each other, hard and deep :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
Dont know if this has been mentioned yet but for a newby who has only skimped at the rules, comming into the chat room, the "plus sign" appears to be a sign that those marked in that way are an easy shag and can be had with an unrequested pvt.
Oh before you shout = I did say "skimped at the rules"
FRED (aka Medic1) un-plused
Oh before you shout = I did say "skimped at the rules"
FRED (aka Medic1) un-plused
Sex God
Quote by Fred
Dont know if this has been mentioned yet but for a newby who has only skimped at the rules, comming into the chat room, the "plus sign" appears to be a sign that those marked in that way are an easy shag and can be had with an unrequested pvt.
Exactly... and who can blame them in assuming that? The + stands for players and all players will put out for everyone, won't they? :uhoh:
Being in the in-crowd always has it's dark side.... :shock:
Sex God
well, I'm rather "non- plus" about the whole situation! :giggle:
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.
And what about the questions raised by those of us who DO use the 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.
So yet again, I raise my (still unanswered) question - why was *I* verified?
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.
Ok, as I said in my earlier post, why not create a forum name of "List Admin" to answer the questions? That way, the questions that are being asked can be answered, without the administrator(s) losing their anonymity
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.
But it's gone horribly wrong from what I can see, at least in SOME ways. And we're STILL having to ask the same questions over and over again, because nobody who is "in the know" can be bothered to answer them!
Bloody hell you lot, 6 more pages!!! and the issue remains the same. Save my poor eyes chat room mods and answer these questions:
1. Define a player and explain to me why they have more importance than say a voyeur? Thats still sexual and just as important in certain peoples lives. Who are you to judge that only shaggers matter? Does oral sex count, or only ultimate, hell you can see the flaws. Surely your system as suggested would be better simply showing people are who they say they are, male / female and actually met someone from the site for whatever reason. If they turn out to be a timewaster take away the '+'
2. Confirm that the system WILL require a person to agree to being verified before they are added. SO you don't have say a male from a couple who to his wife is a socialite suddenly finding a 'player' status by his name in a chatroom. If you going to have this system then that at least a requirement.
3. Define what needs to be in a verification email. Personally the statement (from a previous post) about 'Dear Op, Please verify X as I swung with them' breaks all sorts of personal boundaries, who are you to know who swung with who?
4. Actually explain why this needs to be by anon panel of people?Your answer 'because they will get accused of bias' does not hold water. If they likely to be accused of that they the wrong people. Or 'They will get hounded with complaints' also too bloody right, thats what happens when you run something like this. How would it be if the forum mods all went anon and refused to mediate when people were banned???
5. I would also like to know what your privacy arrangements are? You are holding highly confidential information about persons in a computer system. As such I think you will find you come under various legal obligations regarding that data. Is all information about the verification process deleted immediately after verification (or denial)? You need to confirm nothing is being kept on file.
6. Considering all you guys staying hidden, what is your dispute process?
7. Explain why you kick people who even mention the system in your room, deplorable behaviour.
...and before anyone asks yes I do use the chatroom, just rarely. Also before anyone flames me I used to be a chatroom op, for a 200 concurrent user chatroom so I do know how hard it is.
1. Define a player and explain to me why they have more importance than say a voyeur? Thats still sexual and just as important in certain peoples lives. Who are you to judge that only shaggers matter? Does oral sex count, or only ultimate, hell you can see the flaws. Surely your system as suggested would be better simply showing people are who they say they are, male / female and actually met someone from the site for whatever reason. If they turn out to be a timewaster take away the '+'
2. Confirm that the system WILL require a person to agree to being verified before they are added. SO you don't have say a male from a couple who to his wife is a socialite suddenly finding a 'player' status by his name in a chatroom. If you going to have this system then that at least a requirement.
3. Define what needs to be in a verification email. Personally the statement (from a previous post) about 'Dear Op, Please verify X as I swung with them' breaks all sorts of personal boundaries, who are you to know who swung with who?
4. Actually explain why this needs to be by anon panel of people?Your answer 'because they will get accused of bias' does not hold water. If they likely to be accused of that they the wrong people. Or 'They will get hounded with complaints' also too bloody right, thats what happens when you run something like this. How would it be if the forum mods all went anon and refused to mediate when people were banned???
5. I would also like to know what your privacy arrangements are? You are holding highly confidential information about persons in a computer system. As such I think you will find you come under various legal obligations regarding that data. Is all information about the verification process deleted immediately after verification (or denial)? You need to confirm nothing is being kept on file.
6. Considering all you guys staying hidden, what is your dispute process?
7. Explain why you kick people who even mention the system in your room, deplorable behaviour.
...and before anyone asks yes I do use the chatroom, just rarely. Also before anyone flames me I used to be a chatroom op, for a 200 concurrent user chatroom so I do know how hard it is.
As Steve pointed out earlier in this thread we used to use another chat room which had a similar system.... The difference??..... It creates a "Them and us" environment... Personally I prefer an environment where everyone is equal (apart from the OP's) but unfortunately whether the verification stays or goes there will always be a clique becasue some people use it more often than others, thereby creating a group that know each other and a group that dont...
Strangely enough I went into the chat room last night and I'm not verified yet Steve is when he goes in using his nick.... Seeing as we never play alone I'm still trying to work that one out
I'm not fussed if I have a + to be honest but I have seen chat rooms working with and without the need for verification. The better place to be??.... The one WITHOUT verification...
Just my opinion.
Shireen
Strangely enough I went into the chat room last night and I'm not verified yet Steve is when he goes in using his nick.... Seeing as we never play alone I'm still trying to work that one out
I'm not fussed if I have a + to be honest but I have seen chat rooms working with and without the need for verification. The better place to be??.... The one WITHOUT verification...
Just my opinion.
Shireen
