quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyHibiscus

What can we do, really, besides pay close attention to what is happening?  There isn't a damn thing we can do about what folks do outside the event we are responsible for.  Hell, they can even start their own events!   I made it clear when it came to my own events that everyone needed to be approved in advance~~that doesn't mean that I get to be the moral arbiter of the scene, then or now. 

If we can't do anything, why pay close attention at all?  If you meeting people in advance to see if they can be "approved in advance", what standards are you using to approve them in advance over?  There is a difference between being a busybody/control freak "moral arbiter" and someone exercising reasonable judgement.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael


Setting aside the "one true way" objections and the "two sides to every story" truth, I have some questions about what standards groups should use to ban members.

These are the really hard ones

• <SNIP>
  
• 
  
• Goes after fresh meat-I tend to end up with partners who are new to the scene although my last had been in longer than I had.  Where is the line past which that behavior is predatory?

I am sure there are others and so I look forward to a heated discussion.  I would HOPE that we can limit the scope of this discussion to a POSITIVE intent, regardless of whether you agree or not.  This is about setting useful standards, not creating harems, happy hunting grounds, my way is the right way, etc. so please keep that in mind when posting.  May the drama begin! 

quote:

Take someone who snags a newbie and brands her.  To ME doing that in a new relationship is fucked up and I frankly would have to think long and hard before I didn't either throw that person out or speak to anyone he might get involved with.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alumbrado

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael


Setting aside the "one true way" objections and the "two sides to every story" truth, I have some questions about what standards groups should use to ban members.

These are the really hard ones

• <SNIP>
  
• 
  
• Goes after fresh meat-I tend to end up with partners who are new to the scene although my last had been in longer than I had.  Where is the line past which that behavior is predatory?

I am sure there are others and so I look forward to a heated discussion.  I would HOPE that we can limit the scope of this discussion to a POSITIVE intent, regardless of whether you agree or not.  This is about setting useful standards, not creating harems, happy hunting grounds, my way is the right way, etc. so please keep that in mind when posting.  May the drama begin! 

quote:

Take someone who snags a newbie and brands her.  To ME doing that in a new relationship is fucked up and I frankly would have to think long and hard before I didn't either throw that person out or speak to anyone he might get involved with.

Which goes to the heart of the problem... subjective definitions and perceptions might cover many, most, or nearly all of the possible 'predator' situations, but I know people who have done what you describe with positive results.

Creating a cut and dried prohibition for crossing a subjective line is merely another form of power over others, and will be abused, particularly in groups.

All we can do is take a series of half measures as LH has implied... education, monitoring, etc.  and deal with problems case by case , instead of wanting rules to do it for us.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael


Setting aside the "one true way" objections and the "two sides to every story" truth, I have some questions about what standards groups should use to ban members.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

For those who hear what I say and hear "control freak" I have banned one or perhaps two people during my time running a group with its own munch and parties in two seperate venues and a seperate public playspace.  I failed to ban my partner in the playspace because I effectively couldn't, she had bad scene boundaries in my opinion and would then get all pissy when someone violated her scene despite others walking in and out of it. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael
Obviously someone who does any of the following

• Shows up drunk/stoned (first offense turned away, second banned)

What is the criteria of drunk?  Stoned?  Some people function quite well up to a certain level.

• Any violence outside of a scene

How would you know?  Picture in the news blotter?  Ankle monitor?   

• Repeated conflicts with others

This one is more evident.  I don't want someone around who is constantly causing issues.

• Storing body parts of ex lovers in refrigerators

Umm... once again, is the name in the newspaper?

• Repeatedly violates rules with some violations being faster evictions than others

Ditto to the reason above about causing issues
But what about the following

• Asks the dominant repeatedly to play with doms partner and refused, then starts approaching submissive?  (no is supposed to mean no, some leeway but at some point this is harassment right?)
  
• Touching.  This is difficult, slack must be given to newbies but at what point is the line drawn?  Clearly someone who does it often should be thrown out but where is the grey area?
  
• Violates boundaries?  To me this is easy, if someone either gets violated frequently or violates frequently, they are not ready.  In fact the only person I have thrown out was a submissive who always seemed to get her limits violated.  If that happened today I would probably require her to negotiate prior to any play AND have a third party sit in on those negotiations.

Re: One, two, three.. These I see as something submissives should be taught to handle.  For instance, we had a "gentleman" join us once who assumed real life was like internet ds.  He called himself a master.. but talked about enforcing boundries at munches by twisting someones nuts in a vise if they approached a taken sub.  He also thought that uncollared subs were open to touching, dominating, or serving his needs.  And by that I mean they wore no physical collar.. meant they were fair game.  We as a collect group of submissives banned together in the first hour of his visit, surrounded him, and let him know that we were not his and any further crap he wanted to deal out would be handled by the group of very angry women.  After cornering him for this confrontation, he remained quiet the rest of the evening and never returned.  I am a big believer in collective justice.

• Violates scene boundaries - this is tricky as some people SET poor scene boundaries, there is always the little clique that plays with each other and wanders in and out of their scene.  Newbies often mistake that for permission and enter the scene at which point the drama ensues as they become indignant.  That I can forgive, for ME, what drives me nuts are people who talk loudly near quiet scenes but that isn't a high crime.

This is hard to define and should be DM stuff

These are the really hard ones

• Personal relationships are filled with drama - I was guilty of this, I ripped out a few hearts, one went gay I think and another I know moved out of state.   At what point is someone to broken to allow in?  I certainly was in some ways but at the same time I have grown immensely due to being in the scene.

I really have issues with people being banned because they were not nice.  Growups should be able to handle adult interpersonal issues.  There are plenty of people I don't like, but as I am not living with them, I don't care where they hang out.

• Goes after fresh meat-I tend to end up with partners who are new to the scene although my last had been in longer than I had.  Where is the line past which that behavior is predatory?

Shoot... most everyone I have met goes after fresh meat.  Once again I see this as something people should handle on their own, or maybe they should rethink this stuff that we do.  Being grown up means there is a responsibility to yourself and what you will accept.
I am sure there are others and so I look forward to a heated discussion.  I would HOPE that we can limit the scope of this discussion to a POSITIVE intent, regardless of whether you agree or not.  This is about setting useful standards, not creating harems, happy hunting grounds, my way is the right way, etc. so please keep that in mind when posting.  May the drama begin! 

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael


Would it help if we didn't refer to them as "rules" but instead guidelines?

quote:

Setting aside the "one true way" objections and the "two sides to every story" truth, I have some questions about what standards groups should use to ban members.

quote:

If you draw black lines as to appropriate behavior, and those black lines are any more than basics such as "Over age 18," you are going to step on someone, someday. Now the issue is who do you want to step on, and who is an inadvertent victim?