Verification

18 Nov 2004

Quote by bluexxx
...I did not need a verification system to feel comfortable enough to invite them to my house..... I worked that out myself from their polite emails

I hope you won't think worse of me if I perhaps hint that you might, just, in some small way, be a teensy-weeny little bit more self-confident than the average chatroom newibe? wink

Quote by bluexxx
did I do well?????
8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)

I dunno, you only get a +, not marks out of ten! :shock:

18 Nov 2004

Quote by Ice Pie
I just cannot understand why so much fuss? Nobody is 'forced' to be 'plussed up'

Quote by Jon_TJ
just cannot understand why so much fuss? Nobody is 'forced' to be 'plussed up' - if you have in the first instance and didn't want to be (and have contacted the Admin of the system to say so), then those people have been removed from the list. The mistake is by the person who asked for you to be verified without your permission, not the system, and to be honest would have been done in good faith - not maliciously.

As for

Quote by Ice Pie
one of the room ops has indicated IN THIS THREAD that non-players and players who don't wish to be branded as such should not be allowed in the chat room!!!

They were posting a personal opinion, in the same way you, I or anyone else is. As an op, and not an admin, they cannot make that decision.
As I said - it is working in the chatroom.
I am not here to argue about it - nor can I offer an official view - I merely find there is far more said about it here than in the chatroom, and repeating myself again - it does seem to be working - after all, this is only day 4...................

18 Nov 2004

Quote by Mister_Discreet
I hope you won't think worse of me if I perhaps hint that you might, just, in some small way, be a teensy-weeny little bit more self-confident than the average chatroom newibe?

So all this verification nonsense is basically to hand-hold newbies with self-confidence issues..???
Dxx

18 Nov 2004

Quote by Jon_TJ
I just cannot understand why so much fuss? Nobody is 'forced' to be 'plussed up'

Not true. The people placed on the original list were NOT consulted, and one of the room ops has indicated IN THIS THREAD that non-players and players who don't wish to be branded as such should not be allowed in the chat room!!! In other words, it is COMPULSORY :shock:
That was selective quoting on your part - at least quoted out of context.
Oh really? Well explain the context to me. Explain how arbitrarily putting someone on a list of approved users without their permission, and advertising to all and sundry that the unconsulted person has had sex with a member of the elite is not forcing your wishes on other people?

18 Nov 2004

Quote by JudyTV

Jon_TJ,
with respect you may want to read or reread the thirty or so pages of this thread before you make ill informed comments .
Judy

Sorry Judy, I don't know what you mean - yes there are 30 pages here, but there has hardly been 30 lines about it in the chatroom.
It is also a fact that nobody is forced to become a '+' - some errors of judgement were made in the initial setting up stage yes, but any future requests are just that, requests made by those wishing to obtain a '+'. If you, or someone acting on your behalf, does not request it, it will not be given.
In the fullness of time, any bogus verifications will become clear, and they will be removed from the list.
I really can't say more than that. dunno

18 Nov 2004

Quote by surreycouple2003

I hope you won't think worse of me if I perhaps hint that you might, just, in some small way, be a teensy-weeny little bit more self-confident than the average chatroom newibe?

So all this verification nonsense is basically to hand-hold newbies with self-confidence issues..???
Dxx
Well, if it is why the system is in place, yet I again I will comment on how misguided such a system would be! Having the + mean a genuine person - player or not..... would be much more simple and useful.
However, surely any system cannot be in place JUST to help newbies who lack self-confidence. No... surely not! :shock: :shock: :shock: . If someone is sooooo lacking in self confidence, maybe they are not yet ready to play... so actually the people with the + (under this system) are not the ones they should be talking to!!!! But as everyone with no + is an unknown entity, how do they know who the hell to turn to.... jeeez.... perhaps they'd be forced to use their own judgement :shock: - and if that were the case, the system actually means nothing! As we tell people on the forum.... the best way to get to know people and the scene is to attend munches - to chat with real people in real life..... without a bloody + in sight! confused

:? :?

18 Nov 2004

Quote by bluexxx
So all this verification nonsense is basically to hand-hold newbies with self-confidence issues..???
Dxx

If someone is sooooo lacking in self confidence, maybe they are not yet ready to play... so actually the people with the + (under this system) are not the ones they should be talking to!!!!
But as everyone with no + is an unknown entity, how do they know who the hell to turn to.... jeeez.... perhaps they'd be forced to use their own judgement :shock: - and if that were the case, the system actually means nothing! As we tell people on the forum.... the best way to get to know people and the scene is to attend munches - to chat with real people in real life..... without a bloody + in sight! confused

:? :?
My sentiments exactly - however I was scared to say that in open forum in case my opinion wasnt wanted...!!!
Dxxx

18 Nov 2004

Quote by Ice Pie
Oh really? Well explain the context to me. Explain how arbitrarily putting someone on a list of approved users without their permission, and advertising to all and sundry that the unconsulted person has had sex with a member of the elite is not forcing your wishes on other people?

Quote by Jon_TJ
I just cannot understand why so much fuss? Nobody is 'forced' to be 'plussed up' - if you have in the first instance and didn't want to be (and have contacted the Admin of the system to say so), then those people have been removed from the list.
The mistake is by the person who asked for you to be verified without your permission, not the system, and to be honest would have been done in good faith - not maliciously.

Repeating myself again rolleyes

18 Nov 2004

Quote by Jon_TJ
The mistake is by the person who asked for you to be verified without your permission, not the system, and to be honest would have been done in good faith - not maliciously.

No, it's an error in the system that this was possible. There should be a "double guard" to prevent these things - you should have to submit a request to be verified as well as someone else verifying you. That'd solve these complaints right off the bat.

18 Nov 2004

Quote by JudyTV
some errors of judgement were made in the initial setting up stage yes, but any future requests are just that, requests made by those wishing to obtain a '+'. If you, or someone acting on your behalf, does not request it, it will not be given.
In the fullness of time, any bogus verifications will become clear, and they will be removed from the list.
Pray tell us Jon_TJ, seeing as you seem to be in the know, who will decide who is to be removed from the list? ------ will it be the same person / people who made "some errors of judgement in the initial setting up stage" or will it be a different person / people? With perhaps different errors of judgement.
Judy

Ask the system admin Judy - I am not one, and therefore not qualified to give an answer.

18 Nov 2004

Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
i don't follow the haddock=fish logic? if + denotes genuine, lack of a + denotes what?...

Let me stop you there... + does not denote genuine.
It denotes "..one who is active on the swing scene and who actually meets others on the scene for consensual, recreational sex (Munches and Parties excluded) ... known as genuine and meet the definition above to a member who is already verified (including cases of, "we really didn't fancy each other), AND has not asked for their verifcation mark to be removed."

Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
either it makes a distiction, or it doesn't. if it doesn't, what's the point? if it does, why do you feel the need to be distinguished from other users?

Because I think newcomers will get a better idea of what the SH community is like if they chat to me (or other + people) than if they randomly pick someone to chat to, from a list that includes annoying gits who only arrived in the chatroom a minute before they did.

Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
it's a free and open site that anyone over 18 can access. where might the scam be lurking?

You want a list of every possible scam? Off the top of my head... mebership fees, chatbots boosting numbers in the channel, hookers in the channel, pay to see replies to your free ad, we won't verify you without a visa card, you need to buy an 'adult verification id' to get in, no fees at parties (but it will cost you Â£80 to get the party locations), install this dialler to use the good bits of the site, everyon here id a reported or police cracking down on doggers, we are all actuallly single men... I could go on for days!
Newcomers need reassurance, that's why this scheme was intoroduced.

Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
we we're once newbies clever enough to look round the site and join in with it and make our minds up for ourselves. new newbies however somehow aren't and so need to be told who's who?

Yes.
Look at the number of ones who seem to be real, nice people, but don't decide to stay, just because you and I stayed, doesn't mean that everyone stays!

Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
thanks for at least agreeing that it *is* a sanction. well i deny you the right to sanction me! now what? as 2 equal members abiding by the site AUP, you have the power to sanction me, cos you're plussed, i have no say in that whatsoever, and just accept your power over me? well sorry but no i don't!

I only have the ability to sanction you if you are plussed too. If you want to opt out, then opt out! As it stands, you have the ability to sanction me by getting my + removed if I lie to you, but I have no ability to sanction you because you are not plussed. In what way does this put me "over you"?

Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
you chose to edit out the quote on the bit where i asked if you can see any way that this system might adavantage you to the disadvantage of other users, so i'll ask it again?

Since all users are able to take part in the scheme, the short answer is 'no'.

Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
if this system is of benefit to those who accept it, those who don't accept it can't or won't benefit from it, and so they are denied a benefit you have! that is fair how? kind of the entire point is that it splits the site and elevates certain users!

By the same token, the photo ads system is of benefit to those who accept it. I don't have a photo ad, so I can't benefit from it. Would you support me if I demanded that the whole photo ads section be scrapped?

18 Nov 2004

Here's my final thought on this subject, because it really is going round in circles and some fundamental questions and genuine concerns are being ignored by those who have taken it upon themselves to impose this scheme.
Swinging Heaven stands on a cherished belief that makes it unique among sites of its kind.
It is the belief that every individual deserves freedom of expression within the law, deserves to be whoever and whatever they want to be, deserves the respect of those who may disagree with them, and deserves the trust to reveal as much or as little about themselves as they personally see fit. We do not prejudge, we do not discriminate, and we absolutely do not ever under any circumstances compel.
The verification scheme, and the manner in which it has been implemented, runs entirely contrary to that philosophy in so many ways it represents to me a mockery of everything this community stands for and everything that the founders have built here.
Assuming the right to declare who is acceptable and who is not based on an arbitrary definition by those who presume themselves "better" than everyone else is not what this community is about, and if the egos behind the chatroom want to form an exclusive club that's up to them, but to use what has been given to them freely for such a selfish purpose is both arrogant and ungrateful.
In my opinion, Swinging Heaven doesn't need this level of hierarchy because those who are adult enough to establish themselves in the community without the need for what amounts to an entrance exam, will quickly spot and disregard those who are not so adult.
It is an unnecessary and self-serving extra tier which can only divide, and thereby injure, the community and the principles on which it stands.
Ice Pie.

18 Nov 2004

No Judy, the truth is I am not an Admin, therefore anything I say will be pure conjecture.
The admin will respond to all questions through the correct channels of that I'm sure.
We will end up argueing over silly points, and going round in ever decreasing circles, rather like the thread is.
I can only go back to my previous observation, there are next to no comments in the room over this matter, and it does appear to be working, in the chatroom at least, where it was intended to .....................
No cynisism, sarcasm or any other ism intended or implied.

18 Nov 2004

Quote by xxdevil69
*tries to tempt surreycouple2003 back by flashing her boobs and winking seductively* hwoar:

Sorry Miss Devil but I am a flouncer of my word.
Not even a flash of your sumptuous yet pert yet full yet firm boobs will be enough to make me return to this thread (which I have not).
But I am open to further bribing.... wink

Dxxx

18 Nov 2004

Quote by surreycouple2003
*tries to tempt surreycouple2003 back by flashing her boobs and winking seductively* hwoar:

Dxxx
Well I give up... no-one's ever refused my breasts before!!! :shock:

18 Nov 2004

Quote by xxdevil69
*tries to tempt surreycouple2003 back by flashing her boobs and winking seductively* hwoar:

Dxxx
Well I give up... no-one's ever refused my breasts before!!! :shock:
Miss Devil....
Please dont be upset - it has nothing to do with your sumptuous yet pert yet full yet firm boobs......
Its question of flounce ethics - do you honestly think anyone would take me seriously if I flounced off and then flounced back in again willy nilly.....
:wink:
Dxxxx

18 Nov 2004

You want a list of every possible scam? Off the top of my head... mebership fees, chatbots boosting numbers in the channel, hookers in the channel, pay to see replies to your free ad, we won't verify you without a visa card, you need to buy an 'adult verification id' to get in, no fees at parties (but it will cost you Â£80 to get the party locations), install this dialler to use the good bits of the site, everyon here id a reported or police cracking down on doggers, we are all actuallly single men... I could go on for days!

all those questions are already answered by the site owner on a page that can be found right there at the top of the homepage! this is a free site. it will always be a free site. there are no hidden areas. it is open.
i can understand the verification system on a paysite, because if you're gonna charge people to use it, they wan't to know they are getting their moneys worth.
the + does not denote you are just who you say you are, else munches, parties, social meets etc etc etc would be taken into account. your identity could be confirmed that way, but that is not the point of it.
the +, as explained on the verification pages, and in this thread, denotes that as far as the first tranche of plusses go, they are known to have shagged someone on this site. for you to be verified, at the moment, a decion to say that you are known to have shagged someone on SH has been taken on your behalf, without your permission!
it is an invasion of privacy, and an invitation to breach your confidentiality! but you will either go along with it, and allow us to exercise the right to out your private life, or you will opt out. but discussion of it is out?
neil x x x ;)

18 Nov 2004

Quote by Ice Pie
Here's my final thought on this subject, because it really is going round in circles and some fundamental questions and genuine concerns are being ignored by those who have taken it upon themselves to impose this scheme.
Swinging Heaven stands on a cherished belief that makes it unique among sites of its kind.
It is the belief that every individual deserves freedom of expression within the law, deserves to be whoever and whatever they want to be, deserves the respect of those who may disagree with them, and deserves the trust to reveal as much or as little about themselves as they personally see fit. We do not prejudge, we do not discriminate, and we absolutely do not ever under any circumstances compel.
The verification scheme, and the manner in which it has been implemented, runs entirely contrary to that philosophy in so many ways it represents to me a mockery of everything this community stands for and everything that the founders have built here.
Assuming the right to declare who is acceptable and who is not based on an arbitrary definition by those who presume themselves "better" than everyone else is not what this community is about, and if the egos behind the chatroom want to form an exclusive club that's up to them, but to use what has been given to them freely for such a selfish purpose is both arrogant and ungrateful.
In my opinion, Swinging Heaven doesn't need this level of hierarchy because those who are adult enough to establish themselves in the community without the need for what amounts to an entrance exam, will quickly spot and disregard those who are not so adult.
It is an unnecessary and self-serving extra tier which can only divide, and thereby injure, the community and the principles on which it stands.
Ice Pie.

:worship: :worship:
superb post! Nothing to add to that from me, just excellent!

18 Nov 2004

Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
all those questions are already answered by the site owner on a page that can be found right there at the top of the homepage! this is a free site. it will always be a free site. there are no hidden areas. it is open.

It may surprise you to learn this, but scam sites lie and claim to be free when they are not :shock: it;s only through chatting to people who confirm it that many newbies actually believe those pages.

Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
the +, as explained on the verification pages, and in this thread, denotes that as far as the first tranche of plusses go, they are known to have shagged someone on this site. for you to be verified, at the moment, a decion to say that you are known to have shagged someone on SH has been taken on your behalf, without your permission!
it is an invasion of privacy, and an invitation to breach your confidentiality!
neil x x x ;)

That's was a problem with the first tranche of plusses that doesn't seem to be being continued.

18 Nov 2004

Quote by JudyTV
It appears to be being discussed constantly in the chat room, or so people are telling us.

And that Judy, is heresay, come in for yourself and see......................

Quote by JudyTV
Perhaps they all go quiet on the subject when certain people go in to support its cause. .............Just an opinion.
Judy

Maybe they do, but the chatroom logs don't bear that out. (The chatroom is logged by all ops for purposes of dispute resolution and ban enforcement).

18 Nov 2004

Quote by JudyTV
there are next to no comments in the room over this matter.]

Well, I think this is a wide sweeping statement that is extremely debatable. It appears to be being discussed constantly in the chat room, or so people are telling us. Perhaps they all go quiet on the subject when certain people go in to support its cause. .............Just an opinion.
Judy
Maybe because they get booted for asking about the verification system or receive sarky comments, or warned about even mentioning the Forum.
Allegedly.

18 Nov 2004

It may surprise you to learn this, but scam sites lie and claim to be free when they are not it;s only through chatting to people who confirm it that many newbies actually believe those pages.

a newbie would naturally assume that the site owner was responsible for both the content of his home pages, and the systems put in place on his site wouldn't they? so they might think he was telling porky pies on the one hand re: this is a free site, but they would trust him implicitly that the verification system is real? and if the site owner says it's a free site then tries to put his hand in your pocket then you trust the site even less, so you would have any faith whatsoever in the integrity of any part of the site damaged, and would most likely go elsewhere?
but anyways, ice pie has superbly summed up what some of us have been saying consistently for 30 odd pages. it is an attack on the very foundation of eveything that SH represents, and always has represented.
neil x x x ;)

18 Nov 2004

Quote by JudyTV
you do know that many of the postings here are from chat-room people?

It's also worth pointing out that some members of the forums do not use the same nick in the chat room... Steve and I have different names to the ones we use on the forum...
Shireen

18 Nov 2004

i have to add my piece ti this thread by saying that none of the ops have anything to do with the admin of the new verification scheme which as mark has said is in its trial period to see how it goes.
we are often asked questions about it and try and give as much info about it as we can but at the end of the day it is down to the individual to conact admin
i find it ridiculous that certain forum peolple have come in to spy on the room when they never bother any oyther time
no one is forced to have an + on their name and no one has to have a + before they can verify another person or couple so why can't people sit back keep quiet n let us get on with it and if we fall on our arses then u can say we told so but until then let us get on with it and besides do we come on the forum and tell you lot how it should be run ........no we don't
we work hard at keeping the chatroom running and keeping the idiots out whereas the on the forum any idiot can post and get away with it
so in future please if you can't say anything intelligent or constuctive to help us in keeping the timewasters and idiots out then don't say nowt at all......................................

18 Nov 2004

Quote by JudyTV

It appears to be being discussed constantly in the chat room, or so people are telling us.

And that Judy, is heresay, come in for yourself and see......................

Quote by JudyTV
Perhaps they all go quiet on the subject when certain people go in to support its cause. .............Just an opinion.
Judy

Maybe they do, but the chatroom logs don't bear that out. (The chatroom is logged by all ops for purposes of dispute resolution and ban enforcement).
Once again you are either wrong or have not been looking at your logs, I HAVE been in so have others from the forum. Jon_TJ we are not stupid we see, we hear and we on here also debate among ourselves. Never make the mistake of thinking you are more clever than others, many have come a mighty cropper doing just that in all walks of life. You give the impression you are "In The Know" but when asked a simple question you run away and hide behind the quote "Ask Admin" so if you really do NOT know then stop inferring that you are privy to what you are not really privy to at all. You make wide sweeping statements as if you have all the answers here, but in truth you are saying and posting many words but saying absolutely nothing except contributing to the very circle that you claim is not getting anyone anywhere. You have said that we are just going round in circles yet you keep joining that same circle and imply that that everyone in the chat room has accepted and agreed with it all. This is of course blatantly NOT TRUE. I repeat we are not fools. Its also obvious from the 30 plus pages here that people do not think it is just fine and have accepted it, you do know that many of the postings here are from chat-room people? Once again perhaps you should check your logs.
This is just my opinion and an impression that I have received.
I am not saying you are doing so but once again with respect I really do hate it when people insult my intelligence.
Judy
I can only second that Judy, and very well said. I have been in the chat room more over the last few days - admittedly still not much, but I've definately seen things that give me the impression that all is not as well as the chat room ops have us believe. For example, why was lucyslovely booted when she asked why she had a +? I was there. I saw what happened. I also know that if forum members go in there at the mo they get grilled.... is that usual procedure???? I can only assume that the ops are hiding something. I might be wrong, but they are certainly behaving in a very odd way! Maybe they always behave like that..... who am I, a mere forum member - to judge!
I have said earlier in this thread that the creators of this system (whoever they may be) have expected everyone to roll over, accept their decision without question, and have become arrogant and angry when their "superior" intelliegence has been questioned. This is deplorable behaviour when all people are doing is trying to get to the truth of this total cock up! I feel that the ops have written rough shod over their users and forum members alike. In refusing to answer questions openly they have indeed verified that this is a closed shop of "superiors" who consider the rest of us petty and not worthy of their attention. Like Judy, I feel my intelliegence has been insulted and I for one would like an apology (yeah right! ). I reckon that others who have contributed constructively and eloquently to this thread also need an apology for the way they have been treated.... and yes I mean publically on this thread!!!! I won't hold my breath, but you never know!
Several people have suggested alternatives, such as still having the verification idea but using the + to denote a genuine person, rather than a "player". It would have been nice if the ops had commented on these ideas, maybe said why this type of system would not work and why their method was chosen instead. I get the impression that by using tactics meant to divert our attention (again a blatent insult on our intelliegence) that the ops are hoping that we will just be quiet and forget about this issue. Most probably if the ops (or whoever created this system confused

) had treated us like intelligent adults in the first place, this thread would indeed have died a natural death days ago....
As it is, it is alive and well.... and we are still awaiting answers!

18 Nov 2004

Quote by susiedee69
i have to add my piece ti this thread by saying that none of the ops have anything to do with the admin of the new verification scheme which as mark has said is in its trial period to see how it goes.

That maybe so but the OP's voted on the idea which is why it was put in place... Also lets bear in mind that the OP's were the ones that dished out the first +'s as they were asked to create a list.... So that means that the OP's did have something to do with the implimentation of the scheme...

i find it ridiculous that certain forum peolple have come in to spy on the room when they never bother any oyther time

So the forum members are not entitled to come into a public chat room to see how the verification scheme is working then??... They are not welcome to pop in for a chat to see how it works and if they like it??... Oh forgive me I thought it was open to anyone... :doh:

we work hard at keeping the chatroom running and keeping the idiots out whereas the on the forum any idiot can post and get away with it
so in future please if you can't say anything intelligent or constuctive to help us in keeping the timewasters and idiots out then don't say nowt at all......................................

I think that one or two of the mods on the forums might disagree with you about any idiot being able to post but I will let them point that little detail out to you....
As for your last comment, maybe you should afford us the same... i.e. "if you can't say anything intelligent or constuctive to help us in keeping the timewasters and idiots out then don't say nowt at all"
Please also bear in mind that there are at least 5 ex chat room OP's currently contributing to this debate and therefore we are more than qualified to make comment along with the rest of the forum members...
Shireen

18 Nov 2004

Quote by susiedee69
i have to add my piece ti this thread by saying that none of the ops have anything to do with the admin of the new verification scheme

Ok but if I screw up as a Mod I have to hold my hand up and say I've done it.
OPs have logs to prove who they have dealt with, how and when.
So why isn't admin here posting to explain themselves to us dunno

They are more than welcome to post anonymously through a Mod if they feel the need
Dawn :silly:

18 Nov 2004

did you not read my post obviously not bluexxx you are acting like a dog with a bone and inciting people to post negative things
i did ask that you give usa a chance before condeming it and if you couldn't be constructive then keep quiet n let us fall on our arse if needs be but no u still had to post again n keep it going

18 Nov 2004

Quote by susiedee69
we work hard at keeping the chatroom running and keeping the idiots out whereas the on the forum any idiot can post and get away with it
so in future please if you can't say anything intelligent or constuctive to help us in keeping the timewasters and idiots out then don't say nowt at all......................................

:laughabove:
Sorry, but that is bang out of order!
First, are you saying that the forum mods do not bother to moderate the forum properly? I think anyone who has ever posted on this forum knows how hard the mods work to ensure that idiots are not allowed to post shit and get away with it!
Second, I think that if you think that people have NOT said anything intelliegnt on this thread you have in a few words managed to deeply insult the many people who have made VERY intelliegnt, logical, constructive and eloquent comments in the 30 odd pages of this thread. I am not saying that the chat room ops do not work hard to prevent timewasters from spoiling the fun in the room, I know they do.... but that does not allow them to feel superior to everyone else. It also does not mean that they are right about this system!
Yes, I have been in the chat room to have a look what is being said. So what? I am a genuine swinger..... unverifed under your system, but I do not need a + to prove that I fuck - so I am allowed in there, aren't I? I have broken no rules.... I have not been abusive and I have been chatting to guys in pvt (actually we are meeting a guy very soon who I met in there last night when I was grilled by the ops about why I was there)..... but I have been watching too............. I am freely openly admitting it..... so?

18 Nov 2004

Quote by susiedee69
bluexxx you are acting like a dog with a bone and inciting people to post negative things

I am pointing out the flaws in your system. That is all. People on this forum are intelliegent enough to draw their own conclusions after that.