Verification

17 Nov 2004

Quote by LoverOfOlderLadies
So what is the status with the Verification as it stands then? Im still in Blue's camp personally in that I think its a bit of an unfeasible Idea..
Am I to understand that basically once it comes into effect that I will not be allowed to use the forum unless I shag someone that is already verified within it?
Sean

No Sean.... verification is nothing to do with this forum.... it is only the chat room where verification is happening. It started on Monday. If you go in there you will see poeple with + in front of their names, they are the ones you need to shag before you can get a + yourself. You can still use the chat room as usual if you do not have a +, but you will be unverified and some people might think you are not a genuine player.... therefore you are less likely to get sex than someone who has the +. That is all it means really.

17 Nov 2004

Quote by bluexxx
Put it this way...... if I was verified, I could get a guy verified if I had spent 20 seonds wanking him off in the park... I might never have actually spoken to him, but I have had sex with him.... yes? But yet I could not verify someone who I spent 2 hours talking to at a munch cos that's just not included.... where's the justice and where's the sense in that? The 20 second guy could be a complete tosser who has nothing constructive to add to the site, yet he would get a +..... seems mad to me..... is that really what the ops had in mind???? :doh:

My point exactly Blue, to me the beauty of this site is that you can meet people, get to know and like them, and then make up your own mind, its not something thats forced upon you, and whether you like it or not, with what is being suggested, people (paticularly single males and females) are going to feel pressured to spend more time with "verified" users as opposed to the other users. My feeling is that this is going to create an eliteist society, and we all know they don't work.
Sean

17 Nov 2004

Verified as a KINKY SLAPPER...........
<-------------------------------
survivour of blue's birthday bash and proud!

17 Nov 2004

Quote by LoverOfOlderLadies
So what is the status with the Verification as it stands then? Im still in Blue's camp personally in that I think its a bit of an unfeasible Idea..
Am I to understand that basically once it comes into effect that I will not be allowed to use the forum unless I shag someone that is already verified within it?
Sean

Not at all Sean... the system is not about excluding anyone unless they prove themselves to be exactly what the verification system is trying to counteract: timewasters, men posing as women (which is self defeating as they will soon be found out, so I don't know why they do it in the first place) and assholes coming into the chat room looking for a quick shag (I will take this opportunity to say that these loathesome creatures regard the women in the chat room - our friends - as whores who should drop their knickers on demand). These issues are what the verification system is about!
To a lesser degree the forum users are subject to the same type of spasmodic posting from similar types of people but by it's structure these people are more easily weeded out by the current forum users than in the chat room.

17 Nov 2004

Quote by Wishmaster
Not at all Sean... the system is not about excluding anyone unless they prove themselves to be exactly what the verification system is trying to counteract: timewasters, men posing as women (which is self defeating as they will soon be found out, so I don't know why they do it in the first place) and assholes coming into the chat room looking for a quick shag (I will take this opportunity to say that these loathesome creatures regard the women in the chat room - our friends - as whores who should drop their knickers on demand). These issues are what the verification system is about!

It is easy to prove someone is male or female by a simple phone call. Verification will actually increase the amount of uninvited attention that the verfied fems will get - single newbie male comes in, sees verified fem - thinks, "she's a player, she must be up for it" - get my drift?
The verification process that is in place now is crass and does little to resove the real problems that happen on every chat room.
I think you need to rethink your argument wishmaster

17 Nov 2004

Quote by little gem
Verified as a KINKY SLAPPER...........

aww little gem, will you verify me as a Pervy Tart then, cos i'm sure i once saw you watching me do things to someone who once did things with someone else, and that other someone maybe once shagged someone else or maybe they're just mates i dunno, but anyways, i know for a fact that the other other someone else, not the first someone else, once met someone else that knows me, or maybe knows the first someone else or the second or the third someone else, and i know that they once had a fuck through SH?
purlease? :lol2:
n x x x :P

17 Nov 2004

Quote by bluexxx
Put it this way...... if I was verified, I could get a guy verified if I had spent 20 seonds wanking him off in the park... I might never have actually spoken to him, but I have had sex with him.... yes? But yet I could not verify someone who I spent 2 hours talking to at a munch cos that's just not included.... where's the justice and where's the sense in that? The 20 second guy could be a complete tosser who has nothing constructive to add to the site, yet he would get a +..... seems mad to me..... is that really what the ops had in mind???? :doh:

I think you have a very valid point there Blue and one that needs addressing by the verification administrators. It doesn't mean that the system is fundamentaly flawed but there is scope for improvement. Obviously, were such an occasion arise whereby a "plussed up" person verified another person and that user had posted no more then 3 or 4 posts in the forum and was unkown in the chat room then questions ought to be raised about the verified person's actions for that would be abuse of the system and irresponsible behaviour by the verified person - which is another facet of this system's ability - to remove verified status from those that do not use their status properly.
It is an extreme example of how the system can be abused but valid none-the-less.
Wishmaster.

17 Nov 2004

Not at all Sean... the system is not about excluding anyone unless they prove themselves to be exactly what the verification system is trying to counteract: timewasters, men posing as women (which is self defeating as they will soon be found out, so I don't know why they do it in the first place) and assholes coming into the chat room looking for a quick shag (I will take this opportunity to say that these loathesome creatures regard the women in the chat room - our friends - as whores who should drop their knickers on demand). These issues are what the verification system is about!

I must confess I have yet to be able to get into the chat rooms, I regularly use MIRC but for some reason cannot get it to work for me, however this is besides the point. What im trying to say is that I do agree that these sort of things need to be weeded out, but surely there is a better way. For example, why not have a similar system to some other chat engines, whereby you earn points. and once you earn a certain number are eligible to use chat (points for posting, points for filling in profile, points for picture etc etc) You see the problem as far as I see it is that unless someone I am getting on paticularly well with is already verified, it means I am very unlikely to become verified, which in turn eventually will mean that people will no longer speak to me.
Sean

17 Nov 2004

assholes coming into the chat room looking for a quick shag (I will take this opportunity to say that these loathesome creatures regard the women in the chat room - our friends - as whores who should drop their knickers on demand).

erm . . i happen to know some couples here, who would really take offence to the idea that they are loathsome creatures, because they are in actual fact, and have admitted as much, looking for a quick shag!
and in actual fact, a single fem having a +v is gonna encourage that anyways, as many single fems have pointed out, and have consequently rejected the idea themselves.
can we actually argue on the point of principle here, which some of us understand, instead of just bloody disparaging, cos i'm probably well beyond the line where i look an arrogant tosser trying to address the actual issues here?
n x x x ;)

17 Nov 2004

Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
Verified as a KINKY SLAPPER...........

aww little gem, will you verify me as a Pervy Tart then, cos i'm sure i once saw you watching me do things to someone who once did things with someone else, and that other someone maybe once shagged someone else or maybe they're just mates i dunno, but anyways, i know for a fact that the other other someone else, not the first someone else, once met someone else that knows me, or maybe knows the first someone else or the second or the third someone else, and i know that they once had a fuck through SH?
purlease? :lol2:
n x x x :P
passionkiss

:wink: :wink:
You most deffinately are kinky ;) :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

17 Nov 2004

Quote by Wishmaster
I think you have a very valid point there Blue and one that needs addressing by the verification administrators. It doesn't mean that the system is fundamentaly flawed but there is scope for improvement. Obviously, were such an occasion arise whereby a "plussed up" person verified another person and that user had posted no more then 3 or 4 posts in the forum and was unkown in the chat room then questions ought to be raised about the verified person's actions for that would be abuse of the system and irresponsible behaviour by the verified person - which is another facet of this system's ability - to remove verified status from those that do not use their status properly.

The forum has nothing to do with verification in the chat room, therefore the amount of posts they've done here does not matter. There is nothing in the rules that says that someone needs to be active in the forum in order to be verified in the room - so that is not a valid arguement. The system is unmanageable cos it impossible to say whether or not someone is abusing their status..... how would the admin know if a verified person was just making up stories to get non playing people verified???

17 Nov 2004

Quote by bluexxx

Not at all Sean... the system is not about excluding anyone unless they prove themselves to be exactly what the verification system is trying to counteract: timewasters, men posing as women (which is self defeating as they will soon be found out, so I don't know why they do it in the first place) and assholes coming into the chat room looking for a quick shag (I will take this opportunity to say that these loathesome creatures regard the women in the chat room - our friends - as whores who should drop their knickers on demand). These issues are what the verification system is about!

It is easy to prove someone is male or female by a simple phone call. Verification will actually increase the amount of uninvited attention that the verfied fems will get - single newbie male comes in, sees verified fem - thinks, "she's a player, she must be up for it" - get my drift?
The verification process that is in place now is crass and does little to resove the real problems that happen on every chat room.
I think you need to rethink your argument wishmaster
I disagree Blue. I use the chat room a great deal and I've seen with my own eyes how the female regulars in there are more than capable of dealing with persistent serial pm'ers and assholes. They can be a tough and ruthless bunch in there biggrin

and show no mercy to those that are clearly not interested in adhering to the rules and becoming part of our community but to those newbies that are friendly, respectful and decent the females in the chat room are very courteous and friendly in return.
Wishmaster.

17 Nov 2004

Quote by Wishmaster

Not at all Sean... the system is not about excluding anyone unless they prove themselves to be exactly what the verification system is trying to counteract: timewasters, men posing as women (which is self defeating as they will soon be found out, so I don't know why they do it in the first place) and assholes coming into the chat room looking for a quick shag (I will take this opportunity to say that these loathesome creatures regard the women in the chat room - our friends - as whores who should drop their knickers on demand). These issues are what the verification system is about!

It is easy to prove someone is male or female by a simple phone call. Verification will actually increase the amount of uninvited attention that the verfied fems will get - single newbie male comes in, sees verified fem - thinks, "she's a player, she must be up for it" - get my drift?
The verification process that is in place now is crass and does little to resove the real problems that happen on every chat room.
I think you need to rethink your argument wishmaster
I disagree Blue. I use the chat room a great deal and I've seen with my own eyes how the female regulars in there are more than capable of dealing with persistent serial pm'ers and assholes. They can be a tough and ruthless bunch in there biggrin

and show no mercy to those that are clearly not interested in adhering to the rules and becoming part of our community but to those newbies that are friendly, respectful and decent the females in the chat room are very courteous and friendly in return.
Wishmaster.
I have no doubt that the fem members know how to deal with tossers. That was not my point. The point was that verified fems will get pestered more and more....... and they will spend more time having to deal with these tossers than the unverified fems...... however well they deal with it, the fact is they will still get pestered more due to their + status.

17 Nov 2004

Quote by DeniseBabe
Ive not had one unwanted PVT since having my +......... now thats something i cant complain about

I believe that is not true for everyone, so up to now you have been lucky maybe?

17 Nov 2004

Well I am sorted now
<<----

17 Nov 2004

Quote by bluexxx

Not at all Sean... the system is not about excluding anyone unless they prove themselves to be exactly what the verification system is trying to counteract: timewasters, men posing as women (which is self defeating as they will soon be found out, so I don't know why they do it in the first place) and assholes coming into the chat room looking for a quick shag (I will take this opportunity to say that these loathesome creatures regard the women in the chat room - our friends - as whores who should drop their knickers on demand). These issues are what the verification system is about!

It is easy to prove someone is male or female by a simple phone call. Verification will actually increase the amount of uninvited attention that the verfied fems will get - single newbie male comes in, sees verified fem - thinks, "she's a player, she must be up for it" - get my drift?
The verification process that is in place now is crass and does little to resove the real problems that happen on every chat room.
I think you need to rethink your argument wishmaster
I disagree Blue. I use the chat room a great deal and I've seen with my own eyes how the female regulars in there are more than capable of dealing with persistent serial pm'ers and assholes. They can be a tough and ruthless bunch in there biggrin

and show no mercy to those that are clearly not interested in adhering to the rules and becoming part of our community but to those newbies that are friendly, respectful and decent the females in the chat room are very courteous and friendly in return.
Wishmaster.
I have no doubt that the fem members know how to deal with tossers. That was not my point. The point was that verified fems will get pestered more and more....... and they will spend more time having to deal with these tossers than the unverified fems...... however well they deal with it, the fact is they will still get pestered more due to their + status.
and . . . there are already sanctions to deal with those tossers who break the AUP / room rules anyways. they will get kicked / banned. so if they are truly loathsome creatures, as you argued previously, they won't be in the room that long? those who do abide by the room rules however, are still likely to be categorised as tossers cos they ain't been verified, and are unlikely to find it easy to be verified, no matter how gen they are, cos they ain't yet been verified??
we go round the bend again?
n x x x ;)

17 Nov 2004

As you are a + Denisebabe can i ask if you asked for verification .. the same to you MrD and you wishmaster?
Or have you logged on to find out someone had branded your ass + ?
I can see why you guys want the + it's just increased your chances of getting a shag tenfold...from the poor newbies that come in.... LMFAO.
Its slightly different for us though.. as angel said and shireen and other girls who got auto branded "who the hell has given a total stranger personal details of my private life?"
They will never know even if they ask to be removed from the list.
And so....
This system has been put on to make it easier for the "genuine swingers" to find other "geniune swingers" I think if it works in the chatroom it will work in the I dont at the moment know if some of you are genuine. Apart from the way they've initiated the + list I now think it could work. It's simple if you are + you are a genuine realtime swinger if you arn't a plus you are a fake until you prove otherwise. And if you are genuine and refuse the + then you're hiding something and don't deserve to be genuine.
the best line yet was when Denisebabe said i've been in the room and nothings changed for me apart from getting the + .... thats the point of the + it's only supposed to hit the non genuine peeps ...
works for me lol

....ahhhh shit i aint a + .... scatch this post i'm against it.

17 Nov 2004

Quote by bluexxx

I think you have a very valid point there Blue and one that needs addressing by the verification administrators. It doesn't mean that the system is fundamentaly flawed but there is scope for improvement. Obviously, were such an occasion arise whereby a "plussed up" person verified another person and that user had posted no more then 3 or 4 posts in the forum and was unkown in the chat room then questions ought to be raised about the verified person's actions for that would be abuse of the system and irresponsible behaviour by the verified person - which is another facet of this system's ability - to remove verified status from those that do not use their status properly.

The forum has nothing to do with verification in the chat room, therefore the amount of posts they've done here does not matter. There is nothing in the rules that says that someone needs to be active in the forum in order to be verified in the room - so that is not a valid arguement. The system is unmanageable cos it impossible to say whether or not someone is abusing their status..... how would the admin know if a verified person was just making up stories to get non playing people verified???
Ok. Fair point regarding the forum. It is unrelated to the chat room verification, I merely used the 3 or 4 posts in the forum example as a way of showing a pending verifyee's inactivity across the whole site.
Yes, the system IS open to abuse as is any system anywhere else in the world, but does that in itself mean that we should not at least try to develop a system that enables us to identify undesirable people much more easier than at present. If a verified person does start abusing his or her status then I think that will soon become apparent and they risk losing their verified status and maybe even banned from the site altogether - if they weigh up the pros and cons I'm sure most will see it's not worth the risk.
Wishmaster.

17 Nov 2004

Quote by Wishmaster
Ok. Fair point regarding the forum. It is unrelated to the chat room verification, I merely used the 3 or 4 posts in the forum example as a way of showing a pending verifyee's inactivity across the whole site.
Yes, the system IS open to abuse as is any system anywhere else in the world, but does that in itself mean that we should not at least try to develop a system that enables us to identify undesirable people much more easier than at present. If a verified person does start abusing his or her status then I think that will soon become apparent and they risk losing their verified status and maybe even banned from the site altogether - if they weigh up the pros and cons I'm sure most will see it's not worth the risk.
Wishmaster.

But the example of 3 or 4 posts in the forum cannot be used as evidence that someone is not a genuine player. All it says is that they do not use the forum much, and as forum use is not a requirement of verification, the entire point is irrelevant.
Yes, of course any system is open to some abuse, but this particular one is so full of gaping holes that abuse will be common, not just the odd incident. That is the problem. It hasn'tr been thought through properly. SImple as.

17 Nov 2004

Quote by Jewcy_Joanne
As you are a + Denisebabe can i ask if you asked for verification .. the same to you MrD and you wishmaster?
Or have you logged on to find out someone had branded your ass + ?
I can see why you guys want the + it's just increased your chances of getting a shag tenfold...from the poor newbies that come in.... LMFAO.
Its slightly different for us though.. as angel said and shireen and other girls who got auto branded "who the hell has given a total stranger personal details of my private life?"
They will never know even if they ask to be removed from the list.
And so....
This system has been put on to make it easier for the "genuine swingers" to find other "geniune swingers" I think if it works in the chatroom it will work in the I dont at the moment know if some of you are genuine. Apart from the way they've initiated the + list I now think it could work. It's simple if you are + you are a genuine realtime swinger if you arn't a plus you are a fake until you prove otherwise. And if you are genuine and refuse the + then you're hiding something and don't deserve to be genuine.
the best line yet was when Denisebabe said i've been in the room and nothings changed for me apart from getting the + .... thats the point of the + it's only supposed to hit the non genuine peeps ...
works for me ....ahhhh shit i aint a + .... scatch this post i'm against it.

That's why I luv ya Joanne, you shoot from the hip and have always got something intelligent to say - and I mean that sincerely not as a piss take!
The first I knew of my verified status was when I logged in on Tuesday morning and there it was but I'm not against it so I haven't complained about it. Yes, as I've stated quite clearly earlier in this thread, the first + list was fudged for those very reasons but the people awarded a + that didn;t want it have rejected it and those that have it now are happy to have it.
The system is now working and new + are being awarded after due process and by the request of the people seeking it.
Now when yer gonna get yer ass to Dunstable....... wink

Wishmaster.

17 Nov 2004

Quote by bluexxx

Ok. Fair point regarding the forum. It is unrelated to the chat room verification, I merely used the 3 or 4 posts in the forum example as a way of showing a pending verifyee's inactivity across the whole site.
Yes, the system IS open to abuse as is any system anywhere else in the world, but does that in itself mean that we should not at least try to develop a system that enables us to identify undesirable people much more easier than at present. If a verified person does start abusing his or her status then I think that will soon become apparent and they risk losing their verified status and maybe even banned from the site altogether - if they weigh up the pros and cons I'm sure most will see it's not worth the risk.
Wishmaster.

But the example of 3 or 4 posts in the forum cannot be used as evidence that someone is not a genuine player. All it says is that they do not use the forum much, and as forum use is not a requirement of verification, the entire point is irrelevant.
Yes, of course any system is open to some abuse, but this particular one is so full of gaping holes that abuse will be common, not just the odd incident. That is the problem. It hasn'tr been thought through properly. SImple as.
Then I fervently hope that this entire thread has exposed those gaping holes and the architects of the Verification system will study this thread in fine detail and make any neccessary changes. That is what we have been doing here on these 25 pages of debate: arguing the pros and cons of the verification system so that the outcome is satisfactory for all concerned and that we all remain friends in this - our - community that is Swinging Heaven. In the 3 months since I joined this site I have grown very fond of both it and the people that use it.
Wishmaster.

17 Nov 2004

We wont know wishmaster, as they have chose to avoid the thread, or be insulting, so they not part of this debate.

17 Nov 2004

i hope you can tell i was tongue in cheek with the last bit of the post lol

Unfotunatly hun I aint got a + and i would be slated if I left my clique to play out of my league.... So lose ya + and I'll see about a shag.. :twisted:
There is a point to this .... that people who say dont want to be seen as a + for whatever reason can do /nick and their new name will not show a +
As a couple I'm like shireen I should only be + as my couple nick Jo_Mark_nw_18083 as i havn't ever played without my partner this nick Jewcy shouldn't have a + neither should Marks nick.
The mind boggles that a couple who swing together have one + and the other partner not. thats why i say yet again that the original list is flawed and needs to be scrapped and started again another way.

17 Nov 2004

Quote by Wishmaster

I think you have a very valid point there Blue and one that needs addressing by the verification administrators. It doesn't mean that the system is fundamentaly flawed but there is scope for improvement. Obviously, were such an occasion arise whereby a "plussed up" person verified another person and that user had posted no more then 3 or 4 posts in the forum and was unkown in the chat room then questions ought to be raised about the verified person's actions for that would be abuse of the system and irresponsible behaviour by the verified person - which is another facet of this system's ability - to remove verified status from those that do not use their status properly.

The forum has nothing to do with verification in the chat room, therefore the amount of posts they've done here does not matter. There is nothing in the rules that says that someone needs to be active in the forum in order to be verified in the room - so that is not a valid arguement. The system is unmanageable cos it impossible to say whether or not someone is abusing their status..... how would the admin know if a verified person was just making up stories to get non playing people verified???
Ok. Fair point regarding the forum. It is unrelated to the chat room verification, I merely used the 3 or 4 posts in the forum example as a way of showing a pending verifyee's inactivity across the whole site.
Yes, the system IS open to abuse as is any system anywhere else in the world, but does that in itself mean that we should not at least try to develop a system that enables us to identify undesirable people much more easier than at present. If a verified person does start abusing his or her status then I think that will soon become apparent and they risk losing their verified status and maybe even banned from the site altogether - if they weigh up the pros and cons I'm sure most will see it's not worth the risk.
Wishmaster.
wishmaster i am getting more and more confused?
define undesirable? rhetorical question . . .
i abide by the AUP. i abide by the chat room rules. so my status is what?
i break the AUP / rules, i get binned from the site . . .
so your definition of me as being undesirable, yet abiding by the site rules IS PURELY SOMEONES OPINION THAT HAS NO MORE MERIT THAN ANYONE ELSES!
apologies for shouting! ;)
and since you have the +, and will no doubt benefit from the +, forgive me if i take your argument as being based on something other tha a point of principle, which is what we are trying to establish!
n x x x ;)

17 Nov 2004

Quote by DeniseBabe
I see that the site is mainly for friendship ect........ i havnt actually had sex with many in the year i have been a member of chat. Just because i have a + now doesnt meet im gonna go around shagging people i wouldnt of before

:( :( :( :( dam..thought we all was on a winner here...back to the drawing board lads

17 Nov 2004

Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite

Not at all Sean... the system is not about excluding anyone unless they prove themselves to be exactly what the verification system is trying to counteract: timewasters, men posing as women (which is self defeating as they will soon be found out, so I don't know why they do it in the first place) and assholes coming into the chat room looking for a quick shag (I will take this opportunity to say that these loathesome creatures regard the women in the chat room - our friends - as whores who should drop their knickers on demand). These issues are what the verification system is about!

It is easy to prove someone is male or female by a simple phone call. Verification will actually increase the amount of uninvited attention that the verfied fems will get - single newbie male comes in, sees verified fem - thinks, "she's a player, she must be up for it" - get my drift?
The verification process that is in place now is crass and does little to resove the real problems that happen on every chat room.
I think you need to rethink your argument wishmaster
I disagree Blue. I use the chat room a great deal and I've seen with my own eyes how the female regulars in there are more than capable of dealing with persistent serial pm'ers and assholes. They can be a tough and ruthless bunch in there biggrin

and show no mercy to those that are clearly not interested in adhering to the rules and becoming part of our community but to those newbies that are friendly, respectful and decent the females in the chat room are very courteous and friendly in return.
Wishmaster.
I have no doubt that the fem members know how to deal with tossers. That was not my point. The point was that verified fems will get pestered more and more....... and they will spend more time having to deal with these tossers than the unverified fems...... however well they deal with it, the fact is they will still get pestered more due to their + status.
and . . . there are already sanctions to deal with those tossers who break the AUP / room rules anyways. they will get kicked / banned. so if they are truly loathsome creatures, as you argued previously, they won't be in the room that long? those who do abide by the room rules however, are still likely to be categorised as tossers cos they ain't been verified, and are unlikely to find it easy to be verified, no matter how gen they are, cos they ain't yet been verified??
we go round the bend again?
n x x x ;)
That is utter nonsense Neil. Female members of the chat room have already stated that they are receiving less uninvited pm's - in some cases none at all - due to their new + status.
As to your statement regarding non plussed regulars in the chat room I feel that you are forgetting one vital factor here: Desire.
We are swingers and that involves sex and sex involves desire to have sex with others.
A non-plussed person stands as much a chance of having sex as a plussed up person because others will desire them. It's a basic human instinct and no system anywhere can counteract it.
I believe you have done a great disservice to those "plussed up" people in the chat room by assuming that they regard all non plussed up people as tossers. I certainly do not judge anyone on that basis and anyone who has spoken to me directly will have heard me say at some point that one of my philosophies in life is: I will like anyone until THEY give me a reason not to.
Wishmaster.

17 Nov 2004

I know a song that get on your nerves,
Get on your nerves, get on your nerves,
I know a song that get on your nerves,
Get on your nerves, get get get on your nerves

17 Nov 2004

Quote by Wishmaster
That is utter nonsense Neil. Female members of the chat room have already stated that they are receiving less uninvited pm's - in some cases none at all - due to their new + status.

No instead all the uninvited pm's go to the females who aren't +!!!!!!! (as happened to me twice this week and prior to that I had one in the few times I had been on the chatroom).
It make work in reverse ... the ones with + may now seem unattainable therefore females without + are an easier target!!!!!

17 Nov 2004

I don't think the + makes any difference to the amount of pm's one will receive.
I get them every time I go in the room, and did for the short time that I had my + too.
Chancer's will always try, whether there is a + or not in my experience rolleyes

Tracy-Jayne

17 Nov 2004

thats cos you're a horny bugger and no one can resist trying to get in your knickers :twisted:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx