RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master



Message

cinnfulhussy -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (12/31/2005 11:23:11 AM)

I like the rule. If someone is too timid and insecure to meet in public for something as innocuous as coffee.... then they really aren't a good match for me in the first place. Its just meeting, its not a contract signing. There's no protocol expectations, no pomp and circumstance, just a meeting to confirm that there is a real interest and that each is willing to consider moving forward, or confirming that while it was a pleasent enough meeting, theres no desire to take it further.
There are folks all along the spectrum of their exploration in this lifestyle. Those who are just starting out might not feel comfortable yet meeting, they are often still getting their bearings and exploring what it is about the lifestyle that attracts them. They might not still be sure what it is they want from the lifestyle or a relationship. Those in this situation, that I've come in contact with over the last 8 years tend to be the ones who sit on the fence about meeting. Oh I wanna, but... I'm scared......
Thats fine, they are entitled to their emotions and desires. Just as I'm entitled to find them incompatible with what I'm looking for. Timing is everything! A couple more years into their exploration and they might be cracking the whip to meet after a week!
I don't necessary think that people in this situation are "fake". I really hate that word. They are real people, just not at the same place in the journey. Some folks stop at the Inn, and never continue their journey, they just like watching folks come and go, enjoy being on the fringe, if you will. What is annoying is when they are not honest. My biggest pet peeve is someone who doesn't know what they really want, and doesnt have the clarity to know that. Its ok not to know. I dislike people saying that what I want is what they want, just to continue the conversation. This is why I like the rule. Why invest a lot of time chatting, just to find out that 6 months down the road, they are still "too scared" to meet. If you press the issue, they dissapear. I'd rather spend a couple weeks, to a month then getting let down, than a 6 month or more chunk of my life. Heather is right, its best to get things clarified before one invests too much emotionally.
I dont know that two weeks is the golden formula, but I do think that setting a reasonable time frame to meet, is just that. Reasonable. If the person is not willing to meet within that time frame, whatever it is, you have your answer. Not compatible.



starshineowned -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (12/31/2005 11:40:50 AM)

quote:

**New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay...


quote:

I have posted my version of my 2 week rule in my journal and wonder what may happen if the rest of the D/M’s followed suit.


These two things I think are what I find interesting. If I am reading this correctly. What is being implied and being a effort to impose a movement that now all of a sudden if a person does not wish to meet another person within a "two week" time frame..they are looked upon as fakes.

Had the opening title of been "New Rule for Me", and the question of been "I am putting my thoughts on a "two week" rule in My journal..How do the rest of you feel about this or what do you think? I'd of had no issue with this.

I see a few things happening with this. Those Doms or Masters that are seeking and use this method will be opening up the sub/slave pool alot more for those Doms or Masters that have patience. This I think they will thank those having this a "Rule" for.

I am a particularly shy person. Had any of the Owners past or present insisted on meeting face to face within two weeks..I'd of said absolutely not because my immediate response would of been..they just want to get into my pants..plain and simple. Meeting in a public place has no bearing on changing that.

Want to see if what they look like is really what they look like? Get a web cam. If you are being sincere in what you are saying when talking to persons online..Do you really think that just by forcing a meet within two weeks is going to make them any more truthful or less truthful than exchanges you had online or would of had over time?

I find using this two week rule to be just fine if that is the criteria "you" wish to use to determine "fakes" for you personally. I again have issue with someone trying to impose this mentality onto the populous, and if a person does not comply with it then they are viewed now in this lifestyle as a fake.

In the end though as I stated..this will only open up the door for the "fakes" on either end of the spectrum to meet up at their leisure when it feels right for them, and go on to have a happy long term relationship.




Be Well

starshine
Happy slave of Master Delvin



xxblushesxx -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (12/31/2005 11:48:26 AM)

As a single mother, I have a responsibility to my children, to be careful with ME. I could no way follow someone's two week rule...UNLESS...we had been introduced by r/t friends, and/or I was able to verify EVERYTHING about this person in the short span of two weeks.

Would I love to find the person for me? Uhm, YES. Will hurrying it make it happen faster? Well, in my experience, and in learning from others, it only seems to make heartache and other problems happen faster.

Plus, in talking to people over time, I have found that some say one thing at one time, and another later. That's a good way to 'get to know' someone'....

What works for me, may not work for you. Heck, it may not even work for me!!

Christina



LadyJulieAnn -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (12/31/2005 11:50:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
You know what "terrified" the contacts I made? Telling them how to contact me at the office, pointing them to a website regarding my company that had my picture, and giving them more safe-call precautions than they ever thought of previously. Know why it scared them? Because I'd eliminated all their excuses and now they had to decide if their goal was to "fish, or cut bait". Wannabe's would be scared away.


That's a great point, Merc.

Be well,
Julie



FelinePersuasion -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (12/31/2005 11:56:53 AM)

quote:


ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth



Which leads to the other comment. Nowadays, distance isn't that big an obstacle unless you want it to be.



Distance is an issue with me I refuse to see any one more than 2 hours out of town and preferably they'd be local to me which would be 20 30 40 mins drive but since that'd cut every one out 2 hours is the max I will think about. They'll also come to my town for the first meeting after that it's negotiable.

If they can not tolerate my rule of coming to my town on the first meeting, well there's plenty of others who will. It's totaly un negotiable that they come here first, not only for my sense of saftey but because if they don't show up I am not stuck in some out of town bus station for hours like I was one time.

I agree'd to take a 13 hour bus ride to go see a friend who wanted to cheer me up after a break up I got down there waited two hours or more at the bus station often calling her and I finally took a cab ot her house waited about 5 hours at her house when her son finally came home and told me oh moms not here she went out of town.


So there you have it. She claims she told me not to come, but I never got the notice and if I had I would of felt she should pay for my loss of money over buying a ticket I had to cancle.



DelRey -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (12/31/2005 12:01:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: alandraofMists



quote:

ORIGINAL: DelRey
I am also interested in with the subs/slaves think of having to obide by a Master’s rule before he may or may not become your Master.


i see requiring a person to follow your rules before you have even met them as being pushy and forcing consent before you have earned the right to place a collar on them.

I am not asking for anyone to submit to me or to force them to do anything.

quote:


in your journal you said that if the two week period was to be extended, the woman would have to beg, plead and make offering to you. what do you mean by “offering”? the connotation in the lifestyle is that this is either a financial or sexual gift. is this what you are referring to? in my opinion, requiring this appears that you would be attempting to take advantage of the person.

No, I said there MAY be begging or offerings, which I am implying if there is an extension to the rule it may be negotiated but there should be a very good reason. You jumped to a sexual or monetary conclusion . I think that each instance or possible relationship would very and stand on its own merits.

quote:


to presume that because a person does not meet you within two weeks is a fake or wanna-be seems like a very close-minded view.

it does not imply theat they are a fake or a wanna-be. However if they are ficticious or pretenders I will save a lot of time and find out a lot earlier.

quote:

it simply means that they do not meet your expectations of a partner.


Knight's alandra


Again you may be making my poiint. If they don't meet my expectations and I find out earlier, isn't that o good thing ?

del Rey



DelRey -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (12/31/2005 12:13:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: starshineowned

quote:

**New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay...


quote:

I have posted my version of my 2 week rule in my journal and wonder what may happen if the rest of the D/M’s followed suit.


These two things I think are what I find interesting. If I am reading this correctly. What is being implied and being a effort to impose a movement that now all of a sudden if a person does not wish to meet another person within a "two week" time frame..they are looked upon as fakes.

Had the opening title of been "New Rule for Me", and the question of been "I am putting my thoughts on a "two week" rule in My journal..How do the rest of you feel about this or what do you think? I'd of had no issue with this.

I see a few things happening with this. Those Doms or Masters that are seeking and use this method will be opening up the sub/slave pool alot more for those Doms or Masters that have patience. This I think they will thank those having this a "Rule" for.

I am a particularly shy person. Had any of the Owners past or present insisted on meeting face to face within two weeks..I'd of said absolutely not because my immediate response would of been..they just want to get into my pants..plain and simple. Meeting in a public place has no bearing on changing that.

Want to see if what they look like is really what they look like? Get a web cam. If you are being sincere in what you are saying when talking to persons online..Do you really think that just by forcing a meet within two weeks is going to make them any more truthful or less truthful than exchanges you had online or would of had over time?

I find using this two week rule to be just fine if that is the criteria "you" wish to use to determine "fakes" for you personally. I again have issue with someone trying to impose this mentality onto the populous, and if a person does not comply with it then they are viewed now in this lifestyle as a fake.

In the end though as I stated..this will only open up the door for the "fakes" on either end of the spectrum to meet up at their leisure when it feels right for them, and go on to have a happy long term relationship.




Be Well

starshine
Happy slave of Master Delvin

Why are we splitting hairs here. OK I should have titled the thread differently.
The point is TIME and find out real intensions of a person showing interest earlier.



SweetSarijane -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (12/31/2005 12:56:47 PM)

I personally would have no real problem with meeting someone within a 2 week or so period, but, number one, if they are a great distance away and want to meet, they are going to have to travel to me, or a close enough distance to me, so I can meet with them.

Affordability is a huge factor since I can't afford to travel plain and simple. I can see meeting for coffee, lunch, or dinner in that time frame or close to such. Relationships of any kind take time and effort to build and an in person meeting as soon as possible, if possible, is a smart move. Allowances should be made in that if one can't do the travelling, but the other can, then the one who is able to should do the travelling if they truly wish to meet.

As to abiding by a Master's rule who is not my Master, I have and feel no obligation to do so. Until I submit to that person my choices are my own. If a Dom/Master wants/tries to "impose" his rules on me when I have not submitted to him and/or agreed to abide by such, that's a problem for me and I'm going to think he's likely not right for me and probably move on.

Just my two cents added.



daredevil865 -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (12/31/2005 1:24:46 PM)

DelRey...you have deceided a 2 week rule works for you..and if that works for you then of course you should stick with it...

as for wondering what would happen if all Doms/Masters set the same rule, I have never been one who found I should do something just because some other Dom/Master did it...I guess I am too independant....nor do I believe that you should consider someone a fake just because they fail to match the rules you have set...

for Me I have found when the time is right that a meeting takes place naturally..be it two weeks or two months...I try and let nature take its own course. I do not try and rush it but nor would I wait forever..

DareDevil



alandraofMists -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (12/31/2005 7:59:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DelRey

No, I said there MAY be begging or offerings, which I am implying if there is an extension to the rule it may be negotiated but there should be a very good reason. You jumped to a sexual or monetary conclusion. I think that each instance or possible relationship would very and stand on its own merits.


i was not assuming anything but asking for clarification of what you meant by your wording.

quote:



Again you may be making my point. If they don't meet my expectations and I find out earlier, isn't that o good thing?

del Rey


but as you state in another post on this thread... maybe you should have worded the title differently... the wording does give the perception that who ever does not meet you expectation is considered a fake by you.

Thank you for the clarification of your original post.

Knight's alandra



daredevil865 -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (12/31/2005 8:02:34 PM)

quote:

"fish, or cut bait".


Mercnbeth...and I thought this was a Newfoundland saying for Sh**it or get of the pot

DareDevil



Lenina -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (12/31/2005 8:39:19 PM)

My dom and I have been talking every night on the phone for over a month. And we've discussed and I'm still adament about waiting a week after we meet before having any kind of sexual content in our relationship. That isn't because I'm not attracted to him, or because I don't feel he's the right person for me to do all that jazz with, but because there's no reason to rush, and I want to take my time to prevent any bad decisions that I could make.
So, long story short. Thumbs up on the waiting rule ;)



slaverubyred -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (1/1/2006 8:35:38 AM)

Personally a 2 week rule would depend on a lot of factors, if you live close by and get on well and feel your getting to know someone well then why not meet for coffee in a public place but Never meet anyone in their or your own home its begging for trouble.

I was talking to a Dom last night and he was preparing to go meet a potential sub later that night and he said her instructions had been to be in underwear, blindfolded and bent over clasping her ankles for when he walked in the door!! This was a 1st meet. Fools rush in! No idea how it went, but i hope she saw sense and refused to let him in to be honest, she may well have signed her own death certificate or he could have been. its not just the Doms who could be psyhcopaths.

i met my Master on CM and went onto continue talking to him on msn for about 2 months before i felt comfy enough to meet and then that was public and this Dom id been talking to said i was stupid because id actually had to pick Master up in the car in the street because i couldnt find a parking place .. wasnt stupid the car has little value when it comes to my safety, if id felt worried for any reason id have just turned the engine off got out n locked him inside and left it where it stood, as it turned out waiting all that time turned out to be the best thing i did, Master was patient, never pushed me although did keep suggesting we meet for coffee but not in a pushy way and we met another couple of times for coffee and even then it was another couple of months before we played together haha am i so glad lol He owns me now :o)

Anyway way off point i think but I dont believe anyone for any reason should feel pushed into meeting within 2 weeks if they do not feel 100% comfortable, i was just very nervous and a little shy even though every cell in my body was begging to submit, and having a 2 week rule could potentially ruin would could be a very passionate productive relationship. Ive always been of the mind to go with the flow, if it feels right do it, if it doesnt walk away and no amount of pushing would make me do otherwise, doesnt matter how many safe calls you have in place, the old adage 'Time waits for no man' may be true, BUT any Master/Dom/Domina sub or slave worth their salt should play time at its own game and wait till it does feel right!

Just my 2pence worth :o)

rr x



KnightofMists -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (1/1/2006 2:21:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DelRey

Masters don’t always enjoy imposing Rules, but I have come across an answer to a question on in another thread titled, "Weeding out Wanna-bees" that I believe is worthy it’s own.


In a reply to a writer, Mercnbeth, recommended using a two week rule to visit or at least have an eye to eye meeting when considering a new D/s relationship.

Keep in mind many relationships are LD and a two week rendezvous may be difficult. Rules are made to be broken – yada, yada, yada…. And all of those justifying arguments can be made. However, after thinking of the total waste of time spent sometimes I’m now starting to think this is a good, No – Great quick measuring stick if someone is serious about a relationship or just dipping their toe in the water. I have posted my version of my 2 week rule in my journal and wonder what may happen if the rest of the D/M’s followed suit.



There are particular implications from these statements....

The implication of this post seems to indicate that one is able to keep fakes at bay if one establishes a 2 week meet rule. Of course, the post does acknowledge that are numerous exceptions that would preclude someone to extending or bending this rule. But, at the heart of it... does 2 weeks time establish a person to be a faker or not.... I don't see how one can imply such a derogatory term on another just because they will not meet in two weeks. I would suggest that the content and quality of interactions between two people is a much more important consideration on determining capability with another. I would also suggest that specific actions that show a lack of integrity is a more fitting descriptions of fakers and not actions of choosing to meet or not meet with a prescribed time limit. If one wishes to establish a time based rule on meeting another person for further consideration and relationship development. One should also include what content and quality of interactions should occur in the defined time frame. It is my opinion that establishing a time frame to meet is not in of it self a bad thing... But, it is severely lacking without the substance of what should be occurring within the time frame of consideration.


quote:


I’m interested in what your thoughts are and I am also interested in with the subs/slaves think of having to obide by a Master’s rule before he may or may not become your Master.


Well I am not a sub/slave, but I will answer this question as well since I believe my opinion can have value for some in regards to this particular question. I believe it rather presumptuous for any Dominant to think and expect another person should abide by their rules before this person (sub or slave) becomes theirs. However, I do believe it wise to consider and expect that a person (submissive) will show an ever increasing desire to understand what your (Dominant) preferences/rules are. That a person (submissive) that is truly interested in submitting to a particular Dominant will be intrinsically motivated to follow the preferences/rules of the Dominant. It should be noted that such behavior from the submissive person should not be expected until the submissive as gained an appreciation of the character of the Dominant as well as some idea of compatibility with this person. The pace with which a submissive grows in wishing to following the Dominant’s rules and preferences and actively follows these preferences/rules will vary from person to person and shouldn’t be pressured by the Dominant. The wise Dominant will just sit back and be who he is and watch the actions/inactions of the submissive! As the relationship becomes more serious, a more intense and direct understanding is shared between them, each begins to further test their compatibility with each other and expectations of behavior will grow. But, it is not until the Dominant/Master collars the sub/slave that any expectation of adherence to his preferences/rules should occur. Even what is going to be adhered to would be dependent on the type of relationship as well as what was negotiated prior to collaring.



newflowers -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (1/1/2006 2:57:23 PM)

it is possible that a two-week rule may work, however, i agree that the instinct to go slowly is sound. mercnbeth also stated that doms should be forthcoming with their personal information as an initial measure of establishing trust. this is the key point. it is annoying and sends all sorts of feelings of trepidation when you have to ask for personal information or the potential is so busy asking for information to determine veracity that they provide very little information of their own. while i certainly understand the very real need for discretion, at some point, one must be open.

if a dom contacted me or, on the rare very brave moment, i contact him, and there was a two-week rule, i'd not be initially turned away, but, if within that two-week period, he were not very forthcoming about himself, i would definitely say no, thank you.

if, as you suggest, dominants were to post a such a rule, would you be offended if submisives countered with a no phone beyond introductory conversation and expected you to offer willingly personal and contact information about yourself to me and to my safe call person? what if submissives then made first meet requirements - no play, no sex, just a meet and yes, you may drive to my area and i'll pick a place? would we then be faced with the ever popular topping from the bottom, you're not a "real" submissive accusation?

while the idea is sound and would certainly avoid those who were not interested in talking with intent, it would make me wonder why you're in such a hurry. what may seem like time wasting to you, may be a method used to ensure personal safety. if you are looking for an immediate play partner, i can understand the immediacy, if you are looking for something more, taking time to build a foundation, taking time to make sure that your potential feels she will be safe with you, is not time wasted.

if you are who you say you are, and i am who i say i am, time spent in initial conversation for the purposes of getting to know someone a bit and feeling safe is time well spent. and yes, there are those who are engaging in fantasy and time-wasting, but wading through that morass is like kissing frogs - the price on pays to find the prince.

-a-



nephandi -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (1/1/2006 3:01:16 PM)

i would say that meeting whitin two weeks is a good goal but not nessesarily possible nor nessesary.

The one of you whit the most money or the easiest way to travel should go to the other, if the sub work and have a dificult time getting away from work, but the Dom do not for example or have time of, he should come to her, their roles is not established yet.

i would be extremly sceptial of a Dom that gave me any more rules than call me Sir or similar before we even met.



SirDarkside357 -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (1/1/2006 4:14:51 PM)

I believe this as in all other things between a Master and slave, depends on the 2 of them...some may be able and willing to meet fast, others may not...it depends on lots of things.....personally, I don't mind meeting anyone I am interested in as soon as possible, but then i am about 6'5, and 250 lbs of ex-fugitive recovery agent...I don't have some of the worries that others do, therefore i never force the meeting issue too soon....but I will never let it draw out too long either...if it's right, it's right, go forward with it, if it's wrong, not much will change that, not even time.



Wildfleurs -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (1/1/2006 4:42:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DelRey

Masters don’t always enjoy imposing Rules, but I have come across an answer to a question on in another thread titled, "Weeding out Wanna-bees" that I believe is worthy it’s own.

In a reply to a writer, Mercnbeth, recommended using a two week rule to visit or at least have an eye to eye meeting when considering a new D/s relationship.

Keep in mind many relationships are LD and a two week rendezvous may be difficult. Rules are made to be broken – yada, yada, yada…. And all of those justifying arguments can be made. However, after thinking of the total waste of time spent sometimes I’m now starting to think this is a good, No – Great quick measuring stick if someone is serious about a relationship or just dipping their toe in the water. I have posted my version of my 2 week rule in my journal and wonder what may happen if the rest of the D/M’s followed suit.

I’m interested in what your thoughts are and I am also interested in with the subs/slaves think of having to obide by a Master’s rule before he may or may not become your Master.

del Rey



I always liked to meet as soon as possible before I was owned, and I think if I were single I'd probably want to meet for coffee within a month of touching base online. And from there do some lunch and/or dinner dates just to get to know each other. I was never very interested in long distance relationships, my unofficial rule when I was single was that I wanted someone close enough to deliver a pizza with it still being hot.

Just like I have certain guidelines that I would use if I were single if the dominant had some guidelines I'd certainly be at least amenable to hearing them and seeing if they worked for me (for instance if they had one that the first date was me in a hotel room naked and blindfolded that would *not* work for me and I'd wish them well in their search).

C~



IrishMist -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (1/1/2006 6:34:14 PM)

quote:

but then i am about 6'5, and 250 lbs of ex-fugitive recovery agent...


LMAO dare I ask?




HoosierScorpio -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (1/1/2006 9:18:18 PM)

I usually do not think it is real until we meet face to face until that point is only talking stage. The problem this can also both ways when it comes to subs or slave for I have heard guys driving to meet them and they never show. I like to take my time get to know the person and talking it the way you can do that. I would talk and send files with some one new to the lifestyle for close to a month until we can actually meet. This does not always safe guard things for they could be putting on a show for that long too. The truth is do not rely on the net but try to attend local groups and munches to get to know some one. There are just too many players on the net and they have made it hard to meet real people. The young ladies been burned treat every Dom the same way like they are players but the truth is for every bad seed you might meet some good seeds. It goes both ways for the Dominate and the submissive. I also know of a Guy who is a knows how to talk the talk and in my option he is not a Master for his and his girls actions do not prove they are real but players. So many feel they do not need to show etiquette as address some one as sir but this lifestyle is about protocol and showing some one respect until the prove they lost it in my viewpoint is the lifestyle and we show treat people like that every day life.



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

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125