Verification

16 Nov 2004

Does the cross (+) signify a holier than though attitude, if it is there to show you "put it about" surely a division (/) symbol would be better. Newbies arent going to know what the hell the + sign stands for anyway, chatrooms are instant access and unless they are serious they will not read the sites policies and guidelines, they may just think the +'s are the GOD SQUAD.

16 Nov 2004

Quote by Wishmaster
If this system helps GENUINE new people to swinging become accepted by the regulars then it is a good system.

Actually, no... it is not about differentiating between people who are genuine and people who are just taking the piss.... it is solely about differentiating between players and non players (whatever they are!). This is one reason why the system as it stands is so bizzare. If it was about cutting down on timewasters I would say it had merit, but that is not what it is about. It is about helping players cop off with other players..... which they do anyway cos by definition they know each other anyway confused

. See how this quickly becomes one big illogical circle.
Finding out someone is genuine is easy..... if they really want to play with you they will allow you to ring them - this happens now.... it works.... what's the issue?!

16 Nov 2004

Ummm, there's a difference between "genuine people" and "helpful people". On the rare occaisions I'm in the chatroom, if someone asks a question I can answer, I will try to help them. Ditto the forum. Yet I'm not verified. And yet there's plenty of "genuine swingers" out there who presumably will be (or will end up) verified who are also complete and utter tossers. Do verified people have an obligation to do more than unverified people to help newbies? Is that a condition of verification? Can verification be removed if you choose not to help newbies? No.

16 Nov 2004

Quote by bluexxx
Finding out someone is genuine is easy..... if they really want to play with you they will allow you to ring them - this happens now.... it works.... what's the issue?!

16 Nov 2004

Quote by roger743
Finding out someone is genuine is easy..... if they really want to play with you they will allow you to ring them - this happens now.... it works.... what's the issue?!

Some single guys have a convincing falsetto? :lol2:
The people this system does help, of course, is the single males who manage to get verified - the magic + will make them immediately stand out from the crowd.
But with all those super-verified studly guys around how will any newbie male ever get noticed???? :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: Or is that the idea.... keep it in the family, so to speak??? dunno

16 Nov 2004

Quote by wildwilly
Does the cross (+) signify a holier than though attitude, if it is there to show you "put it about" surely a division (/) symbol would be better. Newbies arent going to know what the hell the + sign stands for anyway, chatrooms are instant access and unless they are serious they will not read the sites policies and guidelines, they may just think the +'s are the GOD SQUAD.

Voice (shown by a + in java chat) is actually a standard feature of internet chatrooms, the symbol for it wasn't chosen by SH, and can't be altered by SH.
People who regularly use other chatrooms will already know that Voice indicates some degree of familiarity with the room, and will not be surprised to see it in #swingingheaven.
I don't see that this is any more open to misinterpertation and devisiveness than the use of "@" for Ops, who (incidentally) ARE the god squad (as newbies already learn very quickly!)

16 Nov 2004

Quote by Mister_Discreet
I don't see that this is any more open to misinterpertation and devisiveness than the use of "@" for Ops, who (incidentally) ARE the god squad (as newbies already learn very quickly!)

No, the + wouldn't be open to mis-interpretation if it meant that the users was a regular user of the room and that is all... but that is not its definition... its definition is as a "player"..... by this system the two are not meant to be the same thing... or are they????? :crazy:

16 Nov 2004

Quote by roger743
The people this system does help, of course, is the single males who manage to get verified - the magic + will make them immediately stand out from the crowd.

Let's face it - single guys are automatically tarred n feathered upon arrival by some people - if this system helps them to establish themselves as genuine swingers and darn nice guys then so much the better, but some assholes will inevitably slip through the net and guess what - they get themselves banned if they misbehave!

16 Nov 2004

Quote by Wishmaster
Let's face it - single guys are automatically tarred n feathered upon arrival by some people - if this system helps them to establish themselves as genuine swingers and darn nice guys then so much the better, but some assholes will inevitably slip through the net and guess what - they get themselves banned if they misbehave!

Again, getting established and known to others is the best way for a guy to get a shag around here...... but nothing in this system will help with that... and in fact it might well take guys longer to do it.... all the guys who have had success from swinging heaven have put time and patience into it...... they did not need a + sign........
And, yet again, the + sign is not meant to denote just genuineness... to get it you have to have shagged one of the powers - therefore how is any new guy ever going to get there in the first place?????
Round and round and round and round we go with this arguement!

16 Nov 2004

Quote by Wishmaster
Let's face it - single guys are automatically tarred n feathered upon arrival by some people - if this system helps them to establish themselves as genuine swingers and darn nice guys then so much the better,

Yes, but you're putting the chicken before the egg. In order to get verified, they have to be established as genuine swingers. Naturally, those who somehow end up verified will end up getting more chances of meets than those who aren't, but then those who aren't will have an even more miniscule chance of ever meeting anyone than they did before. And because they're not meeting anyone, they won't get verified. Because they're not verified, they're not meeting anyone, because really would you take a chance on an unverified male who may well be a time-waster when there's a genuine male verified by swinging-heaven there you could have? Of course not.

16 Nov 2004

Why not just turn it on it's head, non players or timewasters get a plus, then there is not a club based upon the +, real players that want to stay anonymous will not have to work harder to remain discreet.

16 Nov 2004

Quote by Wishmaster
It seems to me that any new system needs a 'bedding in' period to test the practicality of the theory. If it proves unworkable or divisive then guess what - we dump it! Simple really...
It's not a bad system - just give it time. I'm sure any hiccups can be sorted over time. Remember, every new baby needs burping from time to time.
Wishmaster.

I agree, this situation could work after a fashion, but since it was supposedly instigated by room members requesting such a system, how come the other members who knew nothing of it, myself included, were not consulted as to the in's and out's of a working system before it was put into place? Surely a democratic vote is not beyond us mere members? dunno

If the system has been an *opt in* system, anyone who wanted to show their staus could ask to be verified. As it stands at present, we are having to opt out rolleyes

Surely we get boxed and categorised in every other aspect of our day to day lives - do we really need another litle box to jump into? evil

Babies need burping, that is true, but we usually get notice of their arrival and can prepare for it in ways to suit ourselves confused

Tracy-Jayne

16 Nov 2004

Have I just dreamt the 11 pages of comments I've just read on this topic?
I have never been in the chatroom but this hardly invites anyone like me to give it a try.
On this Forum you can read my feelings and opinions,my humour and my serious can PM me or I will have PM'd you - you can answer or ignore that.
Phone calls may be may be arranged - to discuss stamp collecting or share mindblowing sex - who knows which way the wind blows?But I can verify its all genuine on my side.
I'm as good as you in all this and you are as good as me.
I don't even know if I'm a Newbie or what now - When can I take my L plate off?Valid or just some guy who's piled up his post count with a lot of quips and one liners?
So,my humble opinion - the real people who walk the walk not just talk the talk,they will shine through via this amazing,diverse,fascinating site. x

16 Nov 2004

Quote by RedHot
I agree, this situation could work after a fashion, but since it was supposedly instigated by room members requesting such a system, how come the other members who knew nothing of it, myself included, were not consulted as to the in's and out's of a working system before it was put into place? Surely a democratic vote is not beyond us mere members?

Another great point. Surely if this was for the good of all members, why were members not asked their opinions on such a big change to the way the chat room runs?
I have my opinions on why I think that was the case..... I would say it wouldn't take Einstein to work it out either! :confused:

16 Nov 2004

Thats not quite accurate Roger....... I was a single on here, I went to the munches (which I think is the singularly best way for single guys getting established in our community) and met a few people, got known as genuine (and I will use that word coz I believe thats what this is really about) and I am now accepted as one of the community.
I will talk to anyone in the chat room regardless of whether they have a + or not. If they seem a 'genuine' person I will arrange to meet with them at the next munch or a pub somewhere, if they are not 'genuine' I'll ignore them, if they don't show up I'll ask for an explanation - if its a reasonable one I'll accept it, if not I'll report it.
The verification system does not mean you have to shag an OP to get a +.
Any person you shag that has a + and can verify that you shagged them will get you a + ... couples shagging couples where none of them has a + will earn it too. This is probably where the system is under scrutiny.... some people simply don't want their sex lives discussed openly by people who do not know them but surely when people meet up and have sex they must talk to each other at the time and I'm sure the subject of verification will arise.... that is the time for the verified person who doesn't want to be named to say no, don't mention my name.

16 Nov 2004

Quote by Wishmaster
Thats not quite accurate Roger....... I was a single on here, I went to the munches (which I think is the singularly best way for single guys getting established in our community) and met a few people, got known as genuine (and I will use that word coz I believe thats what this is really about) and I am now accepted as one of the community.
I will talk to anyone in the chat room regardless of whether they have a + or not. If they seem a 'genuine' person I will arrange to meet with them at the next munch or a pub somewhere, if they are not 'genuine' I'll ignore them, if they don't show up I'll ask for an explanation - if its a reasonable one I'll accept it, if not I'll report it.
The verification system does not mean you have to shag an OP to get a +.
Any person you shag that has a + and can verify that you shagged them will get you a + ... couples shagging couples where none of them has a + will earn it too. This is probably where the system is under scrutiny.... some people simply don't want their sex lives discussed openly by people who do not know them but surely when people meet up and have sex they must talk to each other at the time and I'm sure the subject of verification will arise.... that is the time for the verified person who doesn't want to be named to say no, don't mention my name.

Yes, I agree.... munches are a great way to show people you are genuine... but attendance at munches does not entitle you to verification...... explain that one!
This system is not about being genuine - it is about who you are known to have shagged!!!!
Hey, and what's all this about couples getting special treatment???? If two non verified couples shag each other they can then become verified????? How does that work then?????? Bloody hell.... yet another way the single guys are disadvantaged..... surely that is not really the case??????
:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:

16 Nov 2004

Quote by Wishmaster
couples shagging couples where none of them has a + will earn it too.

16 Nov 2004

Some thoughts from the last few pages:

Quote by RedHot
how come the other members who knew nothing of it, myself included, were not consulted as to the in's and out's of a working system before it was put into place?

Iâ€™m surprised you didnâ€™t know about this since Jon is an op in the chatroom.

Definition, "A verified user is one who is active on the swing scene and who actually meets others on the scene for consensual, recreational sex."
The first question you need to ask is does this user meet the basic definition of genuine? If the answer is yes, then all you need do is email the verification administrator at with the user's chatroom name (correctly spelled). As soon as it's possible the verification system staff will make the necessary changes.

My reading of this is that if a verified person saw you playing at a club, out dogging or at a private meet or private party, then that would be good enough to allow you to be verified. It does not require the verifier to have actually played with the person being verified.

Question. How do I become a verified user?
Answer. You must be known as genuine and meet the definition above to a member who is already verified. If you have met a verified user simply ask them to email the Verification System Administrator ( ) who will make the appropriate enquiries and then make the arrangements to have your nickname changed in the room.

The onus is on the person wishing to be verified to ask for verification. However the first trenche of verified people will obviously have to have been verified by the system's already-verified people, ie the chatroom ops. If people have been verified without their wishes then that is wrong. They should have been approached first but that does not mean that from now people will be verified without their consent. Verification should only be by the request of the person wishing to be verified.

Quote by bluexxx
Hey, and what's all this about couples getting special treatment???? If two non verified couples shag each other they can then become verified????? How does that work then?????? Bloody hell.... yet another way the single guys are disadvantaged..... surely that is not really the case??????

There is nowhere on the information page that suggests that non-verified couples can verify each other. I did see an op suggest that they could in the chatroom last night but reading the rules again this op must have been mistaken.

Quote by roger743
couples shagging couples where none of them has a + will earn it too.

I hate to be contrary but that's not mentioned anywhere on the verification scheme's website, that I can see. And if that's going to be introduced, it opens up a whole new can of worms. Like... how's it policed? Can I pretend to be a couple, get a second nick that also pretends to be a couple, and get each of my nicks to "verify" the other?
You are right Roger.
As so many on this thread have said, after arguing eloquently and at length, "it doesn't really affect me anyway, as I never or rarely use the chatroom", I would like to say that we have no wish to be verified. We never meet privately with people that we have not met at a club and so have no need to be seen to be genuine. However, I think the system does have merits, for both couples and singles, and I can see no reason why it should not be trialed. A + will not be the way to an instant shag, nor will the lack of a + prevent you from meeting. It might slow the process down for some people who will have to wait for a munch before they get their faces known and then get a meet, but the accepted wisdom on here seems to be that instant shag=bad, patience=good, so that is not a bad thing.
Ric

16 Nov 2004

Quote by northwest-cpl
Some thoughts from the last few pages:
how come the other members who knew nothing of it, myself included, were not consulted as to the in's and out's of a working system before it was put into place?

Iâ€™m surprised you didnâ€™t know about this since Jon is an op in the chatroom.
Ric
What Jon and the other Op's discuss between themselves is op's business and is not discussed between Jon and I.
Discretion is expected by the all op's, and blabbing about every little thing could jeopardise the position of being an op.
I get no special inside information or treatment regarding the room, nor would I expect any.
I am an op's wife, not an op rolleyes

Tracy-Jayne

16 Nov 2004

Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
youaintseenmerite x x x x ;)

Welcome back mate wink

T-J

16 Nov 2004

okay. as it stands then . . .
a certain small number here have imposed a system, that splits the site into two camps, using an arbitrary definition of what constitutes a swinger, and confers special status on a number of users, who happen at this point to be known to them.
if you have a + you are known by us, and you swing!
simple that one. except obviously where the + has already been given to those who don't swing, but we'll sort that out if you request us to remove the status we have just conferred on you. anyways, so long as you match their definition of what makes a swinger, you'll be fine, which seems a bit arbritary, but we'll leave that one for now. ok.
if you don't have a + either . .
you are not known by us.
you are known to us, but you don't swing.
you are known to us, and may swing, but by our definition you cannot be classified.
you are known to us, you definitely swing, but reject the notion of verification.
you are known to us, you definitely swing, but you exercise discretion and prefer not to go before a committee to say i've just shagged so and so.
you are not known to us, but might swing we can't really say.
in what sense does that clarify anything for anybody? dunno

to get the +, which whether you like it or not, will be seen to confer special status, you need to be verified by someone with a +. well what if i swing with people here, but i just don't fancy any of you with the +? so i go forever unverified and remain a second class citizen by those who see the + as having special status on SH? i am classed as non-genuine, by people who know bugger all about me, and will probably now make less effort to find out about me, cos clearly i must be non-genuine because the SH powers have made that decision on my behalf?
the system is unworkable. it adds nothing, and detracts from what SH has always been about. we deny the existence of cliques all the time, but right now, one little clique of users have requested this from SH and as a result another bigger clique of users has been created without discussion.
neil x x x ;)
and no i ain't back mike. just stumbled across this needing to get some addys off a coupla profiles and send a few pm's. ;)

16 Nov 2004

Quote by Steve_D
Well as you are Akicked from the chatroom, and will remain so, for abusing other roomies it doesn't really affect you does it neil?
Steve

This issue affects every single char room user... so attempting another body swerve by making the dabate personal will not work.
It is time the powers who created this system fully explained their thinking behind the creation of this utter mess.
I assume I speak for more than myself in saying that?

16 Nov 2004

Quote by Steve_D
okay. as it stands then . . .
the system is unworkable. it adds nothing, and detracts from what SH has always been about. we deny the existence of cliques all the time, but right now, one little clique of users have requested this from SH and as a result another bigger clique of users has been created without discussion.
neil x x x ;)
and no i ain't back mike. just stumbled across this needing to get some addys off a coupla profiles and send a few pm's. ;)

Well as you are Akicked from the chatroom, and will remain so, for abusing other roomies it doesn't really affect you does it neil?
Steve
sorry steve i figured this was an open debate among site members where opinions are allowed to be shared on this? sorry if i felt i had something to add on this?
humble apologies.
neil x x x ;)

16 Nov 2004

The beauty of the Forum is that it allows all members to voice there opinion. I'm sure there have been lots of posts in the topic from non chatters. One wonders if that comment would have been made if Neil had been for the + , This is the whole idea of the forum where comments.. views... and yes even critisisms can be aired. The plus is that constructive feedback will help to work out teething problems and the minus is that it may be thrown back in SH's face. This is the place to have your say... It's much better to talk about it in the open without fear of retribution than to push this underground. Lets keep this non personal as the thread will get locked if it turns into a slanging match. I'm sure many people are reading these posts and drawing there own conclusions from them so it would be a shame to lose it.
.xX Joanne Xx.

16 Nov 2004

:P I personally find the chatroom to be a bit of a cattle market and now find it hilarious that you need a *quality* classification stamped to your rump too!

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

16 Nov 2004

lol my ass is quality whether it's got a stamp on it or not lol

16 Nov 2004

Quote by bluexxx
I went to check that my username was still without the + yesterday.... and it was..... phew..... obviously I have never shagged one of the powers that be (or maybe they have forgotten ).....

But herein lies the problem as far as I'm concerned.......... I don't even know who the "powers that be" are, and yet I'm almost 100% sure I haven't shagged them! So how did I get verified??
I emailed the list admin last night just after I posted to this thread, and have just been in to the chatroom to check that I no longer have a + (it's gone PHEW!) but have had no reply to my email, so I'm still none the wiser as to who verified me or why dunno

All very strange if you ask me!

16 Nov 2004

Quote by Angel Chat
But herein lies the problem as far as I'm concerned.......... I don't even know who the "powers that be" are, and yet I'm almost 100% sure I haven't shagged them! So how did I get verified??!

Anyone who is verified can verify others.

Quote by Angel Chat
I emailed the list admin last night just after I posted to this thread, and have just been in to the chatroom to check that I no longer have a + (it's gone PHEW!) but have had no reply to my email, so I'm still none the wiser as to who verified me or why

It's anonymous for very good reasons, partly for your privacy, but also so the verification admin(s) can keep their anonymity, which means they can't be accused of bias or abusing their position.
I don't know why people are so offended that they are being verified confused

16 Nov 2004

Quote by Mister_Discreet
I don't know why people are so offended that they are being verified

Maybe because what people do in the private lives is their own business, and who people shag is nothing to do with the powers that be?
Just a thought!

16 Nov 2004

.........I don't know why people are so offended that they are being verified.
Maybe cos it implies that they are "active" and it will gain unwanted attention esp if your a female
Maybe cos it implies that someone without your consent has emailed the "anon" and told em they've been "active" with you.
Maybe it's cos the "anon" havn't bothered to ask the person if in fact this person's email is valid
Maybe cos it's still a free country and if they want to keep there "active" life a secret they are entitled to.
Just a few of many thoughts...
.xX Joanne Xx.