RE: Set of rules...

RE: Set of rules... (Full Version)

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

Message

SailingBum -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 12:55:22 PM)
I wonder if anyone has done a study on micro management in the work place and the effectiveness of it. That is what this post is about. Judging by the posts most folks find it annoying. BadOne

Rover -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 12:56:39 PM)
Isn't that like closing the barn door after the horse is gone? I mean, the error has already happened. And whatever fix is employed adds a new twist with unintended consequences that may cause new errors. It's kind of like trying to create work rules that defy gravity. All the rules in the world won't change the fact that an anvil dropped may break someone's toe. And all the exceptions employed will not change that as a system becomes more complicated it is also more prone to failure. John

LaTigresse -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 12:58:35 PM)
I've been thinking about this thread alot since it's inception as I've been doing alot of really mindless work. A couple of things come to mind. While many of us first read the OP and saw the young man, obviously new and a bit green still, didn't want to take it all that seriously. I was rather guilty of it myself. Then I thought more about it. First of all, there really is not any difference between rules and protocol. Yet, we tend to look at protocol with a more BDSM romantic mindset. If a person creates a thread about protocol, and that person appears to have some experience and so forth, it gets much more positive replies. Sad but true. Minor bitch slap for LaT. Secondly, at least in my eyes, wouldn't it be more productive to think of rules as something you customize for a specific slave? As others have said, with each specific slave you will have specific strengths and weaknesses. Granted, most all dominants have a general idea of what they want, how they want their house and relationship to run. Yet, I have to think that putting too much rigidity in must-haves out there might scare off someone that would be a really awesome fit. I just don't know where the lines might be, or if they will just be different for each of us. How rigid we want to be in determining who will fit us best. Then, I began thinking of the difference between how I interact with different people. There is one woman I've known for years that I would probably be in a D/s relationship with, if her life would allow her to move here, that is very much a switch. While I am dominant with her, I don't interact, would not expect, or even want, the same level of control as I already have with another girl that will be coming here in the next few weeks. I wouldn't want what exists with girl two, with girl one. It just wouldn't flow the same. Two different women, two very different ways of relating and interacting. Yet both feel right, and work within the context of that relationship. Then, I start thinking about growth and change, on both sides of the slash. Relationships have a way of evolving as the people in them change. What may be a rigid rule today, may very well not exist in 10 years due to lack of interest, need or ability. Just a few things that have been going through my head while I do mundane tasks..........which I am heading back to do more of...

celticlord2112 -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 12:58:42 PM)
quote: You deal with the exception and then you improve the process that generated the exception in the first place. I prefer to not generate exceptions. Much easier on everyone, and consumes less Maalox.

KnightofMists -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 1:00:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SailingBum I wonder if anyone has done a study on micro management in the work place and the effectiveness of it. That is what this post is about. Judging by the posts most folks find it annoying. Not sure... but I know my company has been the number one company international in our field for 10 years. I think when people get caught up in micro-managing for the sake of micro-managing your on a fast track to failure. However, if one is focused on getting the desired result then you make the decisions that are appropriate for that result. Sometimes it just might be micro... and sometimes it just might be macro. It's getting the result that is desired!

RCdc -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 1:01:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists quote: ORIGINAL: Rover All of which is well and good, but completely ignores the point that the more complicated any process becomes, the more errors will result (some even generated by the process itself). John I made an edit.. that you might not of seen. You deal with the exception and then you improve the process that generated the exceptioin in the first place. But isn't that too late by then? A rule is a rule. If it is broken because of an error in the rule, then it wasn't much of a rule in the first place - it was a learning curve. If it is broken because it is not obeyed, that is a different matter. the.dark.

NuevaVida -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 1:02:28 PM)
It seems you both are saying the same thing but from opposite sides of the fence. Of course keeping things simple helps to avoid errors. But even keeping things simple is not a sure-fire way of avoiding errors. Errors are still going to happen, and still need to be addressed. And of course, what is complicated for one is simple for another. Personally I didn't see that list of rules as complicated at all. Others did. We're all different. Kudos to the OP for having an idea of what he thinks he wants, and for listing it out and asking for input. That's probably more than a lot of people do, and I see nothing wrong with starting with a game plan. And, some things just aren't simple. Rocket science, brain surgery, satellite reconnaissance, those aren't simple. Either are relationships. Perhaps listing such a wish list as in the OP is what keeps things simple for him, rather than winging it. John, it really does seem as though you are being a contrarian here. Shall we go chew on that gum? [:)]

NuevaVida -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 1:04:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 quote: You deal with the exception and then you improve the process that generated the exception in the first place. I prefer to not generate exceptions. Much easier on everyone, and consumes less Maalox. I don't think anyone wants to generate exceptions, but exceptions are going to happen regardless. That's why many businesses have exception reports - to see how to mitigate the risk of further ones.

Rover -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 1:08:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NuevaVida John, it really does seem as though you are being a contrarian here. Gee, I really don't see it that way. Heck, I was reading along what others had to say and thought I could bridge a gap in understanding that seemed to have developed between them. I haven't been very successful, though. :) quote: Shall we go chew on that gum? [:)] That gum has already been chewed. Let's get a new piece. John

celticlord2112 -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 1:08:52 PM)
quote: That's why many businesses have exception reports - to see how to mitigate the risk of further ones. Actually, most business have exception reports to make sure their Quality Control Managers have something to read every day. Occasionally someone does something actually useful with them (besides origami, which if nothing else is at least artistic), but the frequency of that suggests it is strictly a random occurrence.

KnightofMists -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 1:13:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rover Isn't that like closing the barn door after the horse is gone? I mean, the error has already happened. And whatever fix is employed adds a new twist with unintended consequences that may cause new errors. It's kind of like trying to create work rules that defy gravity. All the rules in the world won't change the fact that an anvil dropped may break someone's toe. And all the exceptions employed will not change that as a system becomes more complicated it is also more prone to failure. The point is that one is to get a Result.... but a result is not at the end of the block. We don't just reach a static point and stop. Life is fluid and keeps flowing. We deal with those twists and unintended consequences always to move yourself into a situation that you wish to maintain. Consider paddling down a river on a canoe. You maintain a course along that river. Sometimes you might head to shore and around a water fall. sometimes you go to the left since the rapids are less turbelent on that side. All for the desire to keep yourself and partner moving along the river safely. I can't tell you what the river will bring ahead except more water. but.. I can make choices that will give us the results that we want. secondly.. a more complicated system doesn't mean it will be prone to more failure.. but when failure does occur.. the consequences are likely to be much more significant and maybe even harder to fix. I am thinking that there is no system much more complicated that getting a man into space. We succeed many times.. and unfortunately we have failed on occassions as well. But did it stop us from continuing the process and getting into space. No.. so was it a failure? I consider failure at the point we choose not to succeed. to date we have not choosen to go into space. I have not choose to end my relationships with my girls. Or after one failed relationship decided not to get into a relationship. I suppose it's how you define failure.

RCdc -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 1:13:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NuevaVida And, some things just aren't simple. Rocket science, brain surgery, satellite reconnaissance, those aren't simple. Either are relationships. Perhaps listing such a wish list as in the OP is what keeps things simple for him, rather than winging it. I kind of agree with this with a but. But that is why people have come back with the constructive advice... such as remembering that not all people can shave everyday, or that people need to know exactly what 'good dressing' is. And that the list shouldn't be viewed as the end, but simply the beginning. Another thing to remember is that people are going to react to this the way they view the labeling. That is another key issue. Who are the participants? And what is the authors definition of what he is labelling? I think the big problem with this 'list' is that it's far too vague. It's all 'tatoes and no meat, as my gran would say.[:)] I also do not see this as a wish list - a wishlist is what you would like - the OP was specific that this was rules. Rules are what a dominant would like, but what they issue. Until he comes back and states otherwise I am following it as such. And I am gonna smooch ya coz you are just so damn smoochable. the.dark.

DesFIP -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 1:14:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists This brings me to a final point in the application of rules within a relationship. The key obedience of the rules is not the quality of the rules themselves thou it is important. It is the quality of the relationship and individuals in the relationship that have a more significant impact on the results. Right. But by setting these rules in stone and saying no exceptions no matter what, he won't get a relationship. Because he's putting the rules before the relationship. What you call having a process in place to deal with times they can't reach you, we call having a tiered set of rules. Meaning if two rules collide one is more important. Living together stuff doesn't really contradict itself anymore but back when we were LDR he would occasionally send me an order for the day. One time he sent me a list of clothes for the day; no panties, short skirt, heels. He forgot that my schedule for the day was escorting a middle school hiking trip. By having a system in place, one rule that superceded another, there was no conflict. However if he cared more about his rules than the reality of life, I could have wound up being punished for chaperoning my kid's class up a mountain side. Obviously that makes no sense. But there are people who would do so anyway because to them the rules trump the people involved. Because they get off on beating an ass red and seek to create situations where the sub can't succeed in order to have an excuse to do this and get off on it. And that's what we were sensing. That he cares more for his rules than for his partner's welfare and that he wants her to fail so he has an excuse to punish. Which says to me he isn't ready to lead anyone as a good dominant doesn't lead people to fail but instead to succeed. And that he needs to deal with his own issues about his sadism so he can just indulge himself without screwing with her emotional well being in order to indulge his sadistic impulses. I don't get the feeling the OP's a bad guy. Just young and not quite ready for prime time.

NuevaVida -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 1:18:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rover Gee, I really don't see it that way. Heck, I was reading along what others had to say and thought I could bridge a gap in understanding that seemed to have developed between them. I haven't been very successful, though. :) From my perspective (then again I'm on pain meds) it really does seem that way. quote: That gum has already been chewed. Let's get a new piece. John It's a deal! Nothing like recycled chewing gum. [:'(]

SimplyMichael -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 1:18:55 PM)
My god people, seems some people have been drinking the "my way is right" coolaide today! Some people make structure work for them, others don't. Some people thrive under structure, some don't. Some people should be loose but are wound too tight and some people could use a whole lot of winding. If it works, more power to you, if it doesn't go back to the drawing board. If you are an idiot about having rules or not having them, you are still an idiot, if you make something work for you that is impossible for someone else, it just means it works for you. What's next, are people going to start arguing that dominants don't mold their partners or some other foolishness?

thishereboi -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 1:19:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rover quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 Rules are made to be broken--always. The more rules you have the less obedience you will get. That is absolute BULLSHIT! KoM, in addition to the very relevant explanations given previously, consider the following.... The more rules you have, the greater the likelihood that a submissive/slave is going to run afoul of one of them; find one or more of them onerous and unacceptable; or find themselves simply unable to comply. It's legislating what was previously acceptable into the unacceptable. In the extreme, there is nothing wrong with breathing. Everyone does it. Now if you were to legislate that into an offense, it's quite likely that someone is going to break that rule. And it stands to reason that someone with 1,000 rules is less likely to achieve full compliance than someone with 10 rules. It's simply a matter of probability. John Good point. And for me a lot depends on the rules themselves. Is there a reason behind them? If I think someone is just making up a bunch of rules so they can feel powerful, without any reasoning behind the rules, then I am going to be less likely to follow them.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 1:19:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SailingBum I wonder if anyone has done a study on micro management in the work place and the effectiveness of it. That is what this post is about. Judging by the posts most folks find it annoying. BadOne Micromanagement doesn't work all that well in the workplace -- however, it seems to work exceptionally well in D/s and M/s relationships that were developed with an interest towards micromanagement. Since the OP is about a D/s or M/s relationship, there's a fair chance are that some folks really do like having micromanagement as part of their relationship, and that this guy may very well be one of them... in which case, the folks wouldn't find it annoying -- in fact, some of them get a pretty effective kick out of it.

NuevaVida -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 1:19:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 quote: That's why many businesses have exception reports - to see how to mitigate the risk of further ones. Actually, most business have exception reports to make sure their Quality Control Managers have something to read every day. Occasionally someone does something actually useful with them (besides origami, which if nothing else is at least artistic), but the frequency of that suggests it is strictly a random occurrence. We have obviously worked at vastly different places. I have no idea of this "most businesses" you are speaking of, but of all the places I have worked (alongside executive groups), they are read, analyzed, and acted upon.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 1:22:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi Good point. And for me a lot depends on the rules themselves. Is there a reason behind them? If I think someone is just making up a bunch of rules so they can feel powerful, without any reasoning behind the rules, then I am going to be less likely to follow them. The thing is, for people who get into high-maintenance, high-protocol, high-management relationships, part of the kick is -being- in that kind of relationship and having those rules, and having that micromanagement... and the rules don't have to be particularly reasonable (though it is, IME, helpful for the rule-maker to have a plan for how the rule will be implemented, how it will be monitored, and what repercussions will be for rules that are broken, as well as the time and energy to follow through). There have been an awful lot of folks dissing the whole idea of high-management, high-protocol, relationships. I can understand if its not your thing, but why bother responding on a thread that is about something you have no interest in, if the only response is "this is stupid and I'd never do it" (which is distinctly not helpful)?

NuevaVida -> RE: Set of rules... (12/4/2008 1:24:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark I kind of agree with this with a but. But that is why people have come back with the constructive advice... such as remembering that not all people can shave everyday, or that people need to know exactly what 'good dressing' is. And that the list shouldn't be viewed as the end, but simply the beginning. Hey babe, I saw the list as a beginning, since he asked for input. quote: Another thing to remember is that people are going to react to this the way they view the labeling. That is another key issue. Who are the participants? And what is the authors definition of what he is labelling? I think the big problem with this 'list' is that it's far too vague. It's all 'tatoes and no meat, as my gran would say.[:)] But vague is good in this case, isn't it? Hence a starting point. The details can be filled in once he actually has someone to give the rules to. :) quote: I also do not see this as a wish list - a wishlist is what you would like - the OP was specific that this was rules. Rules are what a dominant would like, but what they issue. Until he comes back and states otherwise I am following it as such. Perfectly understandable. quote: And I am gonna smooch ya coz you are just so damn smoochable. the.dark. I will never turn down a smooch from you, sweet one! [:)]

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875