Verification

14 Nov 2004

Quote by Mark
However, I think the logic goes something like this. Couple go into chatroom looking to meet up with a bifem. I'm sitting in there with my nick suzybibigboobs and cock in hand. Couple waste hours and hours of their life while I get through 10 boxes of cleanex.
Now, if they only wanted to chat and take it easy then that's fine, but if they REALLY want to meet up then it's damned helpful if others have met me and can indeed confirm that I am a bifem interested in meeting people for play.

Yeah, but what about the newbie unverified bi fem who knows no-one who logs in wanting to hook up with a couple? They all ignore her cos they think she's some sad geezer with cock in hand (in my case, no change there then rolleyes

)

:? :? :?
And don't even get me started about how hard it will be for newbie single guys under this system sad

Nope, still don't get it dunno

But I do see how cos the chat room is "shallow" - OK, that really is what I think of it :shock: - that regular users might want some help to weed out timewasters - I just don't see how this can be the answer :dunno:

14 Nov 2004

Well my head now hurts... I must admit I don't envy the single blokes who go in the chatroom anyway.. I go in and feel a bit like an outsider so just sit quietly watching the screen fly past. Perhaps I'm too innocent for all this afterall...anyway, I'd never get verified having never done any active swinging :shock: lol

14 Nov 2004

Quote by Mark
they'll just know the one with the + sign next to her nick is a bifem who plays.

Exactly, so they'll ignore all the poor bi fems who don't have the all important + sign! Or they'll become victims of trophy hunters :shock: - I hadn't thought of that, KitKat you have a twisted mind! cool

8-) 8-)

Anyways, I don't know why I'm arguing either, it's irrelevant to me, I guess I'm just a shit stirrer :grin: :grin: :grin:

14 Nov 2004

Quote by bluexxx
However, I think the logic goes something like this. Couple go into chatroom looking to meet up with a bifem. I'm sitting in there with my nick suzybibigboobs and cock in hand.

Yeah, but what about the newbie unverified bi fem who knows no-one who logs in wanting to hook up with a couple?
if that is the problem then simply verifying the gender and using that in nicknames might be the answer. rather than 'trial by intercourse' if I might call it that. Are there that many fakers? Going by the forum, I would have said the vast majority of people on here don't want to play (faker) games and will admit to being lepers..... sorry... males, knowing that some lovely people still give us a chance (and quite frankly i've got no wish to jerk off with someone thinking i'm female, though i'm sure i don't speak for all, each to his own!).
so returning to the point, if there is one, what is the big deal about verifying that someone will meet up? if they're in your target market but don't want to 'buy' then maybe you need to sell yourself a bit better (talking rhetorically here), rather than label them as timewasters.
Why not just verify that a couple is a couple and a single-bi-fem is the sbf and then haven't you covered most of the problem area? A darn sight more democratic and easier to administer than confirming someone's place in the sexual network. why, a simple phone call or web conference should suffice, as is already used by some couples, i notice.
Sounds like some of the proponents of this scheme want to hook up 'Macdonalds style'. Nothing in life is guaranteed, especially not human interactions, as everyone is so fond of telling those admittedly naive and deserving single males. The '+' attribute wouldn't gaurentee satisfaction and the absence of one wouldn't mean a timewaster. So keep it objective - reduce the leeway for those who can't even be honest enough to admit their own gender, whilst leaving open the rich possibilities for everyone else.
Or am I wrong? Is the chatroom a fast-food style hookup joint for couples and their (soon to be validated) quarry? That would explain it's fast pace and low level of content which i've experienced - though to some extent that applies to all chat rooms i've ever tried not just the SH chat room especially.

Quote by bluexxx
Anyways, I don't know why I'm arguing either, it's irrelevant to me, I guess I'm just a shit stirrer :grin: :grin: :grin:

me too... .sorry! guess I need something else to worry about!

14 Nov 2004

Quote by northwest-cpl
A verified user is one who is active on the swing scene and who actually meets others on the scene for consensual, recreational sex.

Ok Mark asked the chat room ops to show themselves and add comment to this thread.
wave

I can see both good points and bad points towards this verification trial.
The chat room does have a percentage of timewasters. Often linked into pub closing times, but not always. And so for that reason, to know that you are talking to a "genuine person" does have an added benefit. The amount of times you read "looking for a genuine xyz" seems to be on the increase.
On a downside, discretion does go totally out of the window. I personally did not add any names to the list of nicknames to be verified. Why? because I did not feel comfortable in naming names without first discussing it with them first. As I can now not nominate anybody for 3 months, sorry folks I can't help you. (this block of chat room ops nominating for the next 3 months is to prevent the accusations that you have to shag an op to gain +V status.)
The definition was worded by the chat rooms op's and hopefully covers enough comments.
It mentions active, because people have been known to have given up, but stay on site for the friendship aspect.
consensual. This is to explain that ALL people concerned have given their consent. If you have a partner at home and he / she has not given their consent to your activities then it is very doubtful that you would gain verification. (ie is that single male really single?)
recreational sex. This infers non commercial (ie not a quick shag for a verification) and actually it doesnt say shag. What ever floats your boat, at what ever limits you are happy with. Refer also back to consensual above.
Will it work?
Who knows, if it does I guess it will be kept. If it doesn't work then at least we can say that we have responded in a positive way to the comments and requests of the regular chatroom users.
Ian

15 Nov 2004

It mentions active, because people have been known to have given up, but stay on site for the friendship aspect.

So as an example - If I ever pluck up the courage to return to the chatroom - and asked to be verified - it would be refused.
Which makes sense to me. (no sarcasm there - it really does make sense)

Or they'll become victims of trophy hunters - I hadn't thought of that, KitKat you have a twisted mind!

Perhaps that is why it makes sense!
No seriously, if I went in the chatroom, I would not want to be shown as verified, because I would not be there "on business"
If it works, would you consider additional symbols? for example - for those who are just in to chat?
lhk

15 Nov 2004

Yeah and we'd like a symbol much like Prince , representing the Hedonists formerly known as swingers.

15 Nov 2004

I just wish I could get into the fecking Chatroom to worry about being verified !! :shock: :shock: :shock: confused

:? :? :? lol

15 Nov 2004

Quote by Sgt Bilko
I just wish I could get into the fecking Chatroom to worry about being verified !! :shock: :shock: :shock: :? :? :?

<sigh> here we go again. Try looking here http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/swingers-forum/viewtopic/7655.html rolleyes

15 Nov 2004

Quote by Angel Chat
I just wish I could get into the fecking Chatroom to worry about being verified !! :shock: :shock: :shock: :? :? :?

<sigh> here we go again. Try looking here http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/swingers-forum/viewtopic/7655.html rolleyes

Do you really think I haven't read that !???

:smackbottom:
I have read every piece of info on the subject possible!! I have been to Evening Classes to take my Getting Into the SH Chatroom GCSE. I passed the theory but failed miserably when it came to the Practical!! :roll: :lol: :lol: :lol:
I used to be able to get in without a problem but then I made the mistake of leaving it for more than 30 days without going in there. I am now serving my punishment for leaving it so long!! :cry: :cry: :? :? :? :lol:

15 Nov 2004

Quote by Sgt Bilko
I used to be able to get in without a problem but then I made the mistake of leaving it for more than 30 days without going in there. I am now serving my punishment for leaving it so long!! :cry: :cry: :? :?

Psssst!! Don't tell anyone, this is strictly between you and I Sarge, but so am I redface

ops:

:smug: :smug: I did it Sarge, just ask Steveg :smug: :smug:

15 Nov 2004

Well, I read this thread from start to finish, and I can honestly say I don't understand any of it dunno

I know I'm genuine and that's all that matters
:P

15 Nov 2004

Did you know if you took a hundred monkeys , and sat them at a hundred laptops , eventually they would write the software for MIRC . Probably after about half an hour.

15 Nov 2004

I think a bunch of monkies could write software better than most programmers.
And I say that as a profesional programmer!
In fact, much of the Playstation 2 development software *was* written by monkies, as I complain loudly about on a daily, if not hourly, basis.

15 Nov 2004

Wow, this scheme is gonna cause a lot of resentment.

15 Nov 2004

Quote by roger743
Wow, this scheme is gonna cause a lot of resentment.

Totally agree with rodger.
Some of us don't wish to advertise who we have swung with! Or wish to be discussed!! by other parties in concern. Is it not our own business?? And no one elses,I don't see why we have to shout it from the hilltops so to speak, We personally don't wish ourselves to be discussed by someone from the room in order to get a + next to our name..I personally felt a little intimidated being in the chatroom this morning with only so many peeps having this + next to their name..I def think there will be resentment . In my opinion I would imagine a lot less genuine peeps willing to use the chatroom because of this ..
Lucy&Ken

15 Nov 2004

Quote by bluexxx
Yeah, but what about the newbie unverified bi fem who knows no-one who logs in wanting to hook up with a couple? They all ignore her cos they think she's some sad geezer with cock in hand (in my case, no change there then ) :? :? :?

A newbie unverified bi fem is already treated like that, the difference under the new sytem will be that she'll know who the real couples are, this way she wont be wasting her time talking to other sad geezers with cock in hand if she wants a meet.

Quote by bluexxx
And don't even get me started about how hard it will be for newbie single guys under this system

hmm, time to consider what you mean by "it", which is the key point that made my initial scepticality about this go away when I thought about it. If by "it" you mean getting a shag, that is already pretty much impossible for a pure chatroom user (ie no ad, no forum posts). If they want to get into the 'SH scene', then they will be going through the same process as before, go to a munch and make friends face to face, etc.
If, however. "it" just means chatting in the chatroom rather than arranging meets, then not being verified makes no difference. People already chat to people (or decide not to chat to people) based on the following criteria: is this someone I feel like talking to.
The key point here is that the chatroom isn't all about meets, or even about real people, it's about chatting I'll have no problem chatting to my friends there if they are verified or not (and I know several of my friends there won't qualify because they are either retired from the scene or not ready to take part yet, haven't found anyone local they want to play with, or whatever).

Quote by bluexxx
But I do see how cos the chat room is "shallow" - OK, that really is what I think of it :shock: - that regular users might want some help to weed out timewasters - I just don't see how this can be the answer

The key to reducing the shallowness is to cut down the time that the 'oh this will be a quick way to get a shag' brigade take to lose interest. This will leave more room for the actual chat that currently only happens at odd times of the day (and night) or between the cracks in the 'hello xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx''s and the newbies harassing everyone. I think this system will help to do that.

15 Nov 2004

Quote by Mister_Discreet
A newbie unverified bi fem is already treated like that, the difference under the new sytem will be that she'll know who the real couples are, this way she wont be wasting her time talking to other sad geezers with cock in hand if she wants a meet.

Except that's simply not the case; all the verified '+' means is that the person is a genuine player (or, let's be frank, a mate of a genuine player); it doesn't mean they're a genuine _couple_ or a genuine bifem couple or anything more. If anything, it could trick your bifem into being less careful, because she's more trusting of the guys with a mythical '+'.

15 Nov 2004

Quote by roger743
Except that's simply not the case; all the verified '+' means is that the person is a genuine player (or, let's be frank, a mate of a genuine player); it doesn't mean they're a genuine _couple_ or a genuine bifem couple or anything more. If anything, it could trick your bifem into being less careful, because she's more trusting of the guys with a mythical '+'.

A reasonable point, but one that is answered in the FAQ:

Quote by FAQ
Question. Does verification entitle me to any privileges in the room?
Answer. No. In fact it puts a responsibility on verified users to act sensibly within the room. Be aware that if complaints are received by the administrator that a verified user is not living up to the definition, he, she, or they will loose their verified status and in extreme cases risk permanent removal from the room.

15 Nov 2004

Quote by Sexysteph
Did anyone ask me if I wanted to be verified ????????? No but for some reason I was How does that make this system consentual?

I find this very disturbing :shock:
As Lucy and Ken have said, there are those who prefer to be discrete, either out of modesty, to avoid attracting trophy hunters, or for whatever reason, and to +v people without consulting them first is downright bloody disrespectful! I would hope those with access to the list will remove anyone who asks to be removed, but in the meantime, if chanserv voices you automatically when you enter the room, you should be able to turn it off temporarily by typing
/cs devoice #swingingheaven $me
or if you have mIRC, right click your name and select Control/Devoice from the popup menu.

15 Nov 2004

That's all very well, but it assumes your newbie bifem is (a) going to read the FAQ in that much detail, and (b) is going to complain when she gets screwed over. And is one complaint from a previously unknown (and herself unverified) bifem enough to remove veritifed status? We can all think of very good reasons why it shouldn't. Yes, over time, if enough people complain it'll become possible for the administrators of the system to recognise a pattern of behaviour and strip offenders of their verified status. By which time, of course, the damage will already have been done.

15 Nov 2004

Quote by Sexysteph
This scheme is only trebling their loads and somewhat preventing them from joining in and having fun;

I am a chat room op and my work load has not increased at all because I am nothing to do with the "admin".
Its getting confusing on site, but the mods look after the ads, forum and things, the op's look after the chatroom and the admin look after the chatroom verification.
Being run by a separate person / group of people ensures integrity. I can not +V any mates just because I'm an op.
Ian

15 Nov 2004

Quote by Ian_Mids
Being run by a separate person / group of people ensures integrity. I can not +V any mates just because I'm an op.

I'm curious. Do you get people asking you to +V them?

15 Nov 2004

The whole topic of verification has really got me thinking, which i'm sure, will piss some of you off. lol

I'll try to be as brief as i can.
1 I am a genuine person, i am a genuine person who seeks little additional amusements to fulfill some of my sexual fantasies.
2 I don't want verified, because it would remove one of the basic principles of my lifestyle, which is discretion.
3 I will not verify anyone else, because it will remove one of the basic principles of my lifestyle, which is discretion.
This is how i feel about the verification system but from it, there comes a whole host of issues with regards to the chatroom. Will people continue to talk with me becuase i am not verified? Will people talk to me because i'm not verified? Will newbies ignore me? Will newbies see me as a triumph? Will i now have to make sure, that if i meet up with someone, that i will not be verified from it? (sexysteph) Will it be assumed that i will verify someone else, if we meet up?
Verification is here, and its only time which will tell if its going to work and stay, or not work and go. Good luck to the mods anyway. They ultimately are trying to find a solution to an annoying problem. I just hope that the system does not become corrupt in its nature, since it then defeats the purpose of trying anything at all.
Lots of love, hugs and kisses
Unverified and happy Little
XXX

15 Nov 2004

:!:

:
Verification = to me means >>
(1) Being accepted because I have F****D a person
(2) Being accepted because I have been F****D by a person
Non-verification= to me means >>
(1) Being made an outcast by a person/persons who I have never F****D
or who have never F****D me.
(2) Being ostracized by the "Verified Group" (clique)
What happened to feelings and words like "Friendship and Truth" or are they now just ashes on the Pyre of, maybe, the Chat Room as it was known.
I have been on the Chat Room now for over 12 months and added to the Forum on more than one occasion during that time and can see no reason why I should not be "?? verified ??" just because of lack "Shags" or Old Age ..
FRED (medic1) thought to be by the few as not worthy of Chat Room staus

15 Nov 2004

Quote by Ice Pie
Did anyone ask me if I wanted to be verified ????????? No but for some reason I was How does that make this system consentual?

I find this very disturbing :shock:
As Lucy and Ken have said, there are those who prefer to be discrete, either out of modesty, to avoid attracting trophy hunters, or for whatever reason, and to +v people without consulting them first is downright bloody disrespectful! I would hope those with access to the list will remove anyone who asks to be removed, but in the meantime, if chanserv voices you automatically when you enter the room, you should be able to turn it off temporarily by typing
/cs devoice #swingingheaven $me
or if you have mIRC, right click your name and select Control/Devoice from the popup menu.
It is indeed very disturbing that people are being verified without their consent! :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: . If I was a regular in the chat room, I would not want to be verified by this system. Although I am a "player" (whatever that means) I might not wish it to be the be all and end all of my ID in the room. I would not want constant requests from guys (and couples) to pvt just cos I had the all important + sign! As I only want to play with bi guys I would want to make my own decisions about who I tell that I am a player, rather than have it pre-recorded for me every time I enter the room..... :shock: . I have problem enough replying to emails from straights who can't read..... I am SOOOOOOOO glad I am not a chat room user!
I have yet to see the logic of this idea explained to me in full, though Mark did give one example in which it might help.... however, I think people have the nouse enough to be able to decide for themselves and really it only takes a phone call or a few secs on a web cam to see whether someone is a female and not a male pretending. However, as the system is not trying to verify whether someone is genuine, rather than that they are a player, I find the situation even more confusing and disturbing. So..... you know someone is a player.... then what?..... they might not want to play with you, so what have you gained?! It doesn't make the situation easier at all! I have heard nothing that is positive about this system. I think it is detremental to the chat room and if it stays, to the reputation of swinging heaven.

15 Nov 2004

Having read the thread I can see the pros and the cons. As a single male who has been to meets where people didn't turn up It sounds good. However as a single male who has not been able to swing on here due to people not showing so there for not been able to get verified I can see the down side.
It does not stop me from trying though, and im still smiling (thanks to some of the very sexy avtars in here). Its always been an uphill struggle for single males so having a verification sytem will just make some of us try harder and then people will hopefully realise that some of us are genuine.

15 Nov 2004

Quote by Steve_D
If people read the info page they will see that you don't have to shag (or be shagged by) anyone to be verified.

This is the definition of a verified swinger from the info page...... sounds like they have to engage in sex to me in order to get the magic + ????? If I have got this wrong, please tell me what it actually means confused

A verified user is one who is active on the swing scene and who actually meets others on the scene for consensual, recreational sex.

15 Nov 2004

Quote by Steve_D
If people read the info page they will see that you don't have to shag (or be shagged by) anyone to be verified.

The page says "A verified user is one who is active on the swing scene and who actually meets others on the scene for consensual, recreational sex."
Maybe this needs some clarification?

15 Nov 2004

So if the ops in the chatroom cannot recomend someone for a + then do you have to meet with someone who has a + ?
If so then it becomes a problem if all the people with + are not people with which you wish to play :!: :!: