RE: Protocol

RE: Protocol (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

HardnRuff -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 2:23:20 PM)
A code of correct conduct: safety protocols; academic protocol. .... does that not have to be consistent ??? I think so ..

KnightofMists -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 2:28:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elorin I see a distinction between the two, and I think I see Aquatic's point, but it's a fussy thing to distinguish between. The distinction between Rules and Protocals are fuzzy at best in a general sense. However, I think people will have a preference to using some labels over others. Some say RED for anything remotely Reddish. Some will use Crimson, Cyan etc to express recognition of the variations that exist. Rules, Protocals are kinda like that.

HardnRuff -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 2:35:12 PM)
Knight , I truly agree with that statement about the two being fuzzy to say the least .. ..

CitizenCane -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 2:56:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists quote: ORIGINAL: Elorin I see a distinction between the two, and I think I see Aquatic's point, but it's a fussy thing to distinguish between. The distinction between Rules and Protocals are fuzzy at best in a general sense. However, I think people will have a preference to using some labels over others. Some say RED for anything remotely Reddish. Some will use Crimson, Cyan etc to express recognition of the variations that exist. Rules, Protocals are kinda like that. There's fuzzy and then there's fuzzy- cyan is a greenish blue color most commonly found in four-color process printing. If someone 'cyan's to me, I'm likely to up the intensity.

Elorin -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 2:57:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HardnRuff A code of correct conduct: safety protocols; academic protocol. .... does that not have to be consistent ??? I think so .. HardnRuff I think you don't see the point. Yes, in order for them to work, protocols should be consistent. For a relationship to be consistent, it does not have to have protocols. One does not imply the other. ~E

Rover -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 3:02:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elorin quote: ORIGINAL: HardnRuff A code of correct conduct: safety protocols; academic protocol. .... does that not have to be consistent ??? I think so .. HardnRuff I think you don't see the point. Yes, in order for them to work, protocols should be consistent. For a relationship to be consistent, it does not have to have protocols. One does not imply the other. ~E Within the context of a consistent relationship, is not consistency itself a protocol? John

Elorin -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 3:05:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rover Within the context of a consistent relationship, is not consistency itself a protocol? Not the way I define protocol. But I'm finding I can't write a definition of protocol as it means to me. Close to the political definition, though in a power exchange framework.

Najakcharmer -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 3:57:36 PM)
Some protocols are useful - safety protocols on the job, for instance. I highly recommend adhering to the sorts of protocols that have a real practical purpose, such as avoiding injury and death. Useful stuff. Youi know, don't run on the slippery catwalk with scissors, don't drive the wrong way on the freeway, don't strap chickens under your arms and go play in the tiger cage. Some protocols make people feel good, either because they are exchanging courtesies that show respect and liking for one another, or because they affirm a loving relationship. Some protocols seem to be invented for the express purpose of excluding people who can't or won't dance through the right hoops, or trying to make other people dance through arbitrary hoops to "earn" the privilege of being a group member. Those protocols tend to be arbitrary, pretentious and focused more on negative goals than on positive ones. The trick is telling the differences between these kinds of protocols. Ask yourself whether the primary purpose of a protocol is to be practical and useful, to make people feel good, or to make people feel bad, excluded, or controlled in a negative or nonconsensual way.

AquaticSub -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 4:03:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rover quote: ORIGINAL: AquaticSub I don't really have protocol, though I have rules and those things don't change. I'm sorry, but I don't understand how you distinguish between protocol and rules. Would you mind explaining for me? John To me protocol regarding interaction is more like the military. You have to wear this, or you have to address someone in this way, saluting or not saluting. You have to do this or shit hits the fan and the only reason it exists is to show respect. That just doesn't really exist in our house. There are things that are done a certain way because that is what he likes (his sandwich bread toasted or two packets of coco per cup) but they have never been refered to as protocols. Until this thread, I've never heard the term protocol being applied to anything other then dom/sub interactions, such as kneeling on rice, speech or eye contact restrictions... that sort of thing. It's certainly something to ponder. Edited for improper word use.

AquaticSub -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 4:05:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elorin "Kneel when I say so." is a rule. So is "walk on the side of me that is farthest from traffic." "Kneel before entering my home" seems more like a protocol, as does "curtsy when meeting someone new." I see a distinction between the two, and I think I see Aquatic's point, but it's a fussy thing to distinguish between. chuckles Thanks. You've explained better then I did.

Elorin -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 4:06:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Najakcharmer Ask yourself whether the primary purpose of a protocol is to be practical and useful, to make people feel good, or to make people feel bad, excluded, or controlled in a negative or nonconsensual way. That's a good question to ask - the primary purpose of the protocol. And for me, the primary purpose of a protocol in my D/s relationships is to enhance the feeling of power exchange in a subtle, routine manner. They don't necessary have a practical purpose like taking shoes off to protect the carpet.

AquaticSub -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 4:07:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rover Within the context of a consistent relationship, is not consistency itself a protocol? John I would consider it more a tool of effective communication.

AquaticSub -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 4:08:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elorin quote: ORIGINAL: HardnRuff A code of correct conduct: safety protocols; academic protocol. .... does that not have to be consistent ??? I think so .. HardnRuff I think you don't see the point. Yes, in order for them to work, protocols should be consistent. For a relationship to be consistent, it does not have to have protocols. One does not imply the other. ~E Bingo! (By the way, do you want a biscuit? I just got back from Popeye's [:)])

Rover -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 4:09:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elorin quote: ORIGINAL: Najakcharmer Ask yourself whether the primary purpose of a protocol is to be practical and useful, to make people feel good, or to make people feel bad, excluded, or controlled in a negative or nonconsensual way. That's a good question to ask - the primary purpose of the protocol. And for me, the primary purpose of a protocol in my D/s relationships is to enhance the feeling of power exchange in a subtle, routine manner. They don't necessary have a practical purpose like taking shoes off to protect the carpet. Don't protocols such as kneeling in front of a Dominant have a very practical purpose of reinforcing the power exchange? Maybe even the practical purpose of assisting in the transition from the hectic workday, to a calmer head space associated with home and a fulfilling relationship? Those seem like practical purposes to me. John

HardnRuff -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 4:13:22 PM)
Until this thread, I've never heard the term protocol being applied to anything other then dom/sub interactions, such as kneeling on rice..... that would be defined to Me as punishment for a given offense not protocol by far.

Rover -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 4:16:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HardnRuff Until this thread, I've never heard the term protocol being applied to anything other then dom/sub interactions, such as kneeling on rice..... that would be defined to Me as punishment for a given offense not protocol by far. And I've always heard the term applied to any consistent behavior a Dominant wanted from their submissive/slave. Whether that be something as "vanilla" as how to prepare a cup of coffee, or how to present themselves for inspection. John

AquaticSub -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 4:17:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HardnRuff Until this thread, I've never heard the term protocol being applied to anything other then dom/sub interactions, such as kneeling on rice..... that would be defined to Me as punishment for a given offense not protocol by far. Some people would disagree with you. I would view speech and eye contact restrictions as a punishment and not protocol if they were applied to me.

Elorin -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 4:17:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rover Don't protocols such as kneeling in front of a Dominant have a very practical purpose of reinforcing the power exchange? Maybe even the practical purpose of assisting in the transition from the hectic workday, to a calmer head space associated with home and a fulfilling relationship? Those seem like practical purposes to me. I think that reinforcing the power exchange is a purpose but not a practical one in the way Najakcharmer mentioned, or the example I gave. The purposes you list are certainly purposes, and they are certainly clear cut purposes, but they are not practical in the way of the examples given.

Rover -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 4:20:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elorin quote: ORIGINAL: Rover Don't protocols such as kneeling in front of a Dominant have a very practical purpose of reinforcing the power exchange? Maybe even the practical purpose of assisting in the transition from the hectic workday, to a calmer head space associated with home and a fulfilling relationship? Those seem like practical purposes to me. I think that reinforcing the power exchange is a purpose but not a practical one in the way Najakcharmer mentioned, or the example I gave. The purposes you list are certainly purposes, and they are certainly clear cut purposes, but they are not practical in the way of the examples given. How do you distinguish between practical and impractical? It seems rather capricious and arbitrary. John

MadRabbit -> RE: Protocol (7/9/2007 4:22:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kyraofMists Whenever a thread is started asking about protocols there seems to be a negative reaction from many about this word. To me a protocol is a particular behavior that is carried out given a particular set of circumstances. An example from my life is that when he returns home he is met at the door and greeted. What is your gut reaction to this word? Do you like it/hate it and why? Knight's Kyra I used to hate it, but then I had a really awesome mentor type friend in a neighorbing city realign my perspective one night during a conversation. People automatically associate it with strict rules or military type structure or something confining. I dont view it as any, but rather as something that is a tool to make my life easier as a dominant. Protocols to me are simply how things are done in the relationships. I like my coffee a certain way every morning. I dont want to have to tell my submissive or slave how to make it every single morning so I say "This is how I want my coffee every single morning." Thats a protocol. Simple as that. We use protocols all the time, but most people just simply dont call what they are doing protocols. Someone asked the difference between rules and protocols and rules to me are "what you are not going to do" while protocols are the "how you are going to do it" If I say "You will not spill my coffee", thats a rule. If I say "You will make my coffee a certain way.", then thats a protocol. Rules determine boundaries and protocols provide direction so I dont have to constantly stand over someone's shoulder every single day to get things according to my personal preference.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.027344E-02