Quote by tallnhairy
Ahh simple, get Steve to say he met you last night with intent, instant +
:laughabove: :laughabove:
Shireen
xxx
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Verification
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.
True, but this is actually a very good thing. It means that they will be bugging an experienced chatroom user who knows that we name and shame unwanted pvts. They will therfore be put through the inevitable 'read the rules or you are out' warning and either learn or be kicked before they had as much chance to scare off as many other genuine new arrivals as they would have before.
Quote by HornyBear
You two, Wishmaster and Mr_Discreet, have made yourselves known as really nice genuine guys and from posts in the room I guess you have met your share of contacts. So the room works for you and you (and I for that matter) didn't need a shagbadge to play in the 'scene' so why do we need it now?
This is the crux of the issue, and something that seems to be widely misunderstood. We don't need a 'shagbadge', but new arrivals do need to know that at least some of the chatroom users are genuine. It's not there for us, it's there for them.
There is a big problem in the chatroom that new arrivals get pounced on by hoardes of other newbie unwanted pvt-ers and are scared off before the less pushy regulars get past the "hello how are you" stage of the conversation. That's what this system is intended to help cut down on.
Maybe if people with + were designated 'the welcoming committee' rather than 'verified' then this whole kerfuffle would have been sidestepped?
Sex God
A couple more pages and this thread will have achieved official Superhuman Rambling status in record time. I wonder what it will do to mark this orsp... ausipi... spish... special occasion 
Quote by tallnhairy
Maybe Mister Discreet, but I think a lot of this thread is about how poorly the system came into being, and how poorly scrutinised the reasons for it and the definitions used were put together.
That's very true, but those points have become thoroughly jumbled up with the rest of the debate. What I'm trying to do here is deal with the conceptual misgivings and misconceptions that people have, not the implementational ones, and I'm not defending the way it came into being or the definitions.
i think the problem here is that some people are adverse to change - i've been in the chatroom today and it's no different to before, apart from the fact that some people have a symbol next to their name - not a big thing! i'm not verified, am i bothered? no. when i'm known more on the chatrrom i will be - i actually think this is a good way to see if people have staying power, rather than being fly-by-nights who come in for a quick peek and giggle and disappear.
i personally dint think it made a difference - half the verified people are people i know anyway!
i personally dint think it made a difference - half the verified people are people i know anyway!
Quote by LoverOfOlderLadies
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
taa daaaaaaaa!
i thank you for that! that is entirely the point!
it is pure unadulterated bollox! it adds NOTHING! yet this particular sledgehammer is being used to crush a tiny little walnut, and it changes the entire face of the site. the fact someone hasn't yet swung with someone with a + does not make them less genuine! so why do you want us to tell you personal details of who has fucked whom to establish something that is ludicrous in conception! yet the fact remains NOT having the plus will be seen by many as an indication that you are NON-GENUINE! consequently you have a lesser standing on this site till you fuck someone with a + !
so in a nutshell the + means bugger all, and genuineness can be discovered anyways quite easily, by anyone who is a genuine person themselves? yet it detracts in huge ways to the open, friendly, non-cliquey atmosphere, and changes absolutely the entire face of the site, and it labels you. well how many times have we had a row about LABELS on this site, and yet the powers that be now seek to use labels for you! you are what you are. there is no place for any kind of labelling whatsoever here.
i am not here to be involved in a flame war! i am here to tell you that this is an entire nonsense, which anyone can see reading the mass of comments from members here if only they are open to criticism and willing to actually accept reason, rather than standby their own opinion without being able to defend that opinion in any reasonable way. personal attack does not an argument make!
i may no longer be a chatroom user, as was pointed out, but believe you me i could quite easily have had the little +, cos i could quite easily be verified by those with a + in there. i would still have made every single comment i have made on this thread, and i would still have denounced it, cos i do not need to spill my guts on the sexual activity i have had through this site to make me GENUINE!!
finally, once this system is in place in the chatroom, which is after all part of SH, will the argument that the entire site should adopt it gain more weight, and will we have this entire row again at some point in the future? it could be argued that verification should be applied to Lets Meet Up, or to the Ads, for the exact same reasons. if you want the entire site to demand that you can prove you belong to a clique of users, accept this. if not, reject it out of hand.
neil x x x ;)
Quote by Mr_D
This is the crux of the issue, and something that seems to be widely misunderstood. We don't need a 'shagbadge', but new arrivals do need to know that at least some of the chatroom users are genuine. It's not there for us, it's there for them.
you what?
so WE are quite clever or persistent enough to have worked that out for ourselves, but newbies, which we once were remember, are clearly so bloody dumb that they couldn't possibly work that out without SH ops awarding the shagbadge?
perhaps you'd like to rephrase mate?
neil x x x ;)
Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
This is the crux of the issue, and something that seems to be widely misunderstood. We don't need a 'shagbadge', but new arrivals do need to know that at least some of the chatroom users are genuine. It's not there for us, it's there for them.
you what?
so WE are quite clever or persistent enough to have worked that out for ourselves, but newbies, which we once were remember, are clearly so bloody dumb that they couldn't possibly work that out without SH ops awarding the shagbadge?
perhaps you'd like to rephrase mate?
neil x x x ;)
It's not a question of newbies being 'dumb', it's a question of them not knowing anyone yet. If you'd like to suggest some other method by which you could enter a room you've never been in before and know who to trust and who not to, please let us know!
Sex God
Quote by DeniseBabe
I totally agree.......... the chatroom has not changed at all, people are still as friendly as they ever were
Maybe the forum only users should log in the chatroom and see exactly how the + has effected the chat...... simple....... point of the matter is..... it hasnt.
I've just been in.
So... if the + has no effect, what's the point of the system in the first place?
:grin:
Quote by DeniseBabe
I think its more in place so that peole can log on and know that it isnt full of timewasters like ive heard other sites are..... having never visited another site of this nature im not sure how true that is
Now we see problem, am I a timewaster being a voyuer? Sorry Denisebabe but this was the 2 tier system people were saying would happen.
Sex God
Quote by DeniseBabe
I totally agree.......... the chatroom has not changed at all, people are still as friendly as they ever were
Maybe the forum only users should log in the chatroom and see exactly how the + has effected the chat...... simple....... point of the matter is..... it hasnt.
I've just been in.
So... if the + has no effect, what's the point of the system in the first place?
:grin:
I think its more in place so that peole can log on and know that it isnt full of timewasters like ive heard other sites are..... having never visited another site of this nature im not sure how true that is
Well, no... cos proving someone is genuine is not what verification is about. I could understand it if it was. Much more people could be shown to be genuine if the definition included those that had been to munches and parties - but they are not allowed to be verified if they have ONLY been to munches and parties. It is only players that are verified - that's why the system is so open to abuse - people can just lie..... so, no, you don't know someone is really who they say they are under this system at all
Quote by DeniseBabe
The thing is it isnt going to work if not everyone supports it 100% .... ie those asking to have their + removed.
What would have maybe been a better option was to add a new section in the rules to state that this is the way the site will now be run and its either participate or leave.
Your never going to get a true reading if all users dont participate
Ahh so you either shag or sod off, would you like a shovel for the hole you are digging? I was just starting to accept the idea that this was not as bad as it sounded. Now you confirming all my worst fears about the system.
Sex God
Quote by Fred
I think that ALL chat room uses should have a profile in the Forums befor they are allowed into the Chat Room .
Booted out of one would mean booted out of both.
But then once again I am off my rocker
Fred
Oh yes = Hi Neil mate = talking lots of scence again
If we were all booted out of the forum the way people get booted off the chatroom, there would be nobody left within two weeks!
Sex God
Quote by DeniseBabe
The thing is it isnt going to work if not everyone supports it 100% .... ie those asking to have their + removed.
What would have maybe been a better option was to add a new section in the rules to state that this is the way the site will now be run and its either participate or leave.
Your never going to get a true reading if all users dont participate
So that would make verification both non consensual AND compulsory :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:
I reckon people would be falling over themselves to say that they don't play even if they do! I've never shagged anyone right.... I've a virgin!
The reason why people aren't supporting it is cos it's crap! It has been imposed on users who were perfectly happy...... why try to force them to participate?
Sex God
Quote by DeniseBabe
What would have maybe been a better option was to add a new section in the rules to state that this is the way the site will now be run and its either participate or leave.
Are you saying people who are players but don't want to be identified as such are not welcome in the chat room?
Quote by DeniseBabe
The thing is it isnt going to work if not everyone supports it 100% .... ie those asking to have their + removed.
What would have maybe been a better option was to add a new section in the rules to state that this is the way the site will now be run and its either participate or leave.
Your never going to get a true reading if all users dont participate
Ahh so you either shag or sod off, would you like a shovel for the hole you are digging? I was just starting to accept the idea that this was not as bad as it sounded. Now you confirming all my worst fears about the system.
As i said im crap with words..... never meant that at all, sorry you took it that way.... sorry
Apology accepted, text is a bugger to communicate in at best of times...
Sex God
Quote by Ice Pie
What would have maybe been a better option was to add a new section in the rules to state that this is the way the site will now be run and its either participate or leave.
Are you saying people who are players but don't want to be identified as such are not welcome in the chat room?
Well, I just got a grilling when I was just in there....... bloody scary, and they call us on the forum scary....... god help any newbie on there!!!!
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
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
Quote by Mister_Discreet
This is the crux of the issue, and something that seems to be widely misunderstood. We don't need a 'shagbadge', but new arrivals do need to know that at least some of the chatroom users are genuine. It's not there for us, it's there for them.
you what?
so WE are quite clever or persistent enough to have worked that out for ourselves, but newbies, which we once were remember, are clearly so bloody dumb that they couldn't possibly work that out without SH ops awarding the shagbadge?
perhaps you'd like to rephrase mate?
neil x x x ;)
It's not a question of newbies being 'dumb', it's a question of them not knowing anyone yet. If you'd like to suggest some other method by which you could enter a room you've never been in before and know who to trust and who not to, please let us know!
mr_d
i am really not flaming you now so please don't take offence.
when i was a newbie who knew noone on the site, i went into the room, and i chatted to people. i believe most users here did the same. i suspect you did too?
it wasn't easy to earn recognition. it took time and effort. which personally, i think is what is required on a swinging site where people are possibly going to let you into a relationship. it requires trust. you earn it. you are not awarded it . it is really as simple as that!
neil x x x ;)
Sex God
Quote by DeniseBabe
What would have maybe been a better option was to add a new section in the rules to state that this is the way the site will now be run and its either participate or leave.
Are you saying people who are players but don't want to be identified as such are not welcome in the chat room?
Oh buggar im not saying that......... i can see both sides of the argument......... everyone is as welcome as they ever where, i simply mentioned a diff way it could have been approached, which was bloody wrong wasnt it :doh:
I agree. It should have been approached very differently. I think that is what the last 24 pages have been saying. And yes, attendance at munches is most definately a sign of being active on the site....
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:
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 as it is in effect already, but only in the chatroom, not here in the forums. Also it only puts a + by your name (in the chatroom), it has no other effect. You can still login and talk....
as long as you dont break any of the myriad of rules or generally irritate an op, or mention the litlle +, or anything like that...
Edit: Added word NO to other effect, thanks ICE
