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

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



Message

CrappyDom -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (6/29/2006 7:47:48 AM)

I agree about needing to meet to see if things are what they seem.  I have recently met someone I seem to have a very intense connection with.  However, we both know that that could fade instantly when we meet.  So two choices, savor what we have or take the big leap and meet.

We are of course going to meet and soon and are both attempting to keep emotions in check till then with limited success.  I don't want a long distance relationship, but I definitely will NOT have one where I haven't spent time in that persons physical presence and now the connection exists in real life.  I just will not waste my time that way.

Connections are rare, real ones where it survives in face to face meetings are even rarer and thus the odds of your online/phone/whatever relationship surviving meeting are pretty low which means most online connections aren't "real" in my opinion.  For those who's knees are overactive, note I said "most" meaning if yours survived, it doesn't negate my point.



zumala -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (6/29/2006 8:12:11 AM)

I only read about half way through the entire thread before I had some thoughts I wanted to write down before I forgot them.  [;)]
 
1) A meeting is potentially more dangerous for a female than a male.  It's natural for them to be cautious about meeting a strange male.
 
2) Why not try a phone call or two first, just to break the ice a little more?  Have that be something you ask for in two weeks. 
 
3) Unless you're specifically looking in your area only, 2 weeks for a meeting will probably kill a lot of your prospects.  Traveling isn't cheap.  Coffee is one thing, paying for an airline ticket and a motel room in another state is something else!
 
4) Anyone who insists on meeting in 2 weeks after a meeting online... I would suspect of wanting to get into my pants.  Real relationships take time to develop.  So I'd probably drop anyone who made such a requirement of me for safety's sake.
 
Just a few thoughts.  [:)]
 
zuma



lisa1978 -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (6/29/2006 8:21:58 AM)

I do not have a problem with meeting as soon as possible. It is a good idea and I doubt anyone could really argue with it. I just find that any arbritary rule/time frame is kind of stupid.

Strictly from a online apart from some distance point these are my thoughts.

I find this a little too much self serving from the dominant side. I am searching online for a person right now and I am talking to several people that I am interested in. Now I am one of those persons that does not or tries not to get emotionally attached from Emails and phone calls. Now I seriously doubt that if after two weeks someone flies to me or drive many hours to see me for a cup of coffee or even a couple of dates and we hit it off is still going to be acceptable with me talking and seeing other potential owners. On the otherhand, I find two weeks to be a complete joke as a time period to become exclusive.

Now, I am sure if people respond they will say that they might understand this and that is not the purpose of the meeting, but I live in the real world and somebody taking that amount of time and money is not looking for a lets just meet for a cup of coffee situation. Maybe not play and sex but not just lunch either. There are many ways to uncover fakes. Phone calls at various times of the day, webcams, work emails and others. I just think in long distance situations meeting so soon is fine but the expectations of what to get out of those meetings if they are positive could cause problems as well.

I just think there is a big difference from theory to reality.

I experience these thoughts and demands the both times I went searching for someone online. Personally, I find these time enforced demands to be red flags. An artificial way to move relationships along. I think they would work so much better that after an intital postive exchange of messages that both people agree to some time frame for phone calls and visits. If the two people cannot agree on the time frame than both can move on. Dominant making one sided demands like two week meeting or move in after six months like a poster had in another thread are going to exclude more potential people. Will it weed out some fakes, sure, but at what price?




Arpig -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (6/29/2006 8:52:55 AM)

quote:

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.


If  I am even considering being somebody's master, then I damned well expect them to abide by my rules as far as the progression of the relationship goes. If  I decide it is time to meet and the sub thinks otherwise, then the sub obviously does not see me as their master, and can go back to searching, with my blessings.



ownedgirlie -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (6/29/2006 8:55:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CrappyDom

I agree about needing to meet to see if things are what they seem.  I have recently met someone I seem to have a very intense connection with.  However, we both know that that could fade instantly when we meet.  So two choices, savor what we have or take the big leap and meet.

We are of course going to meet and soon and are both attempting to keep emotions in check till then with limited success.  I don't want a long distance relationship, but I definitely will NOT have one where I haven't spent time in that persons physical presence and now the connection exists in real life.  I just will not waste my time that way.

Connections are rare, real ones where it survives in face to face meetings are even rarer and thus the odds of your online/phone/whatever relationship surviving meeting are pretty low which means most online connections aren't "real" in my opinion.  For those who's knees are overactive, note I said "most" meaning if yours survived, it doesn't negate my point.


~grin~ Is she in the Bay Area?  We could carpool  [:D]



Caretakr -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (6/29/2006 9:03:46 AM)

This is easy.

Have them send you a picture of them self holding a certain object,in a certain pose.

It's pretty much impossible for a player to fake that.



zumala -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (6/29/2006 10:17:36 AM)

How do you figure that, Caretakr?  Couldn't the faker simply have a pretty girl hold said object and take a picture of her?  Maybe a wanker uses his pretty sister as a model?  Nothing can ever be 100% 'proven' online.  You're still left with the choice of believing or disbelieving.
 
zuma



KnightofMists -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (6/29/2006 12:38:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CrappyDom
We are of course going to meet and soon and are both attempting to keep emotions in check till then with limited success.  I don't want a long distance relationship, but I definitely will NOT have one where I haven't spent time in that persons physical presence and now the connection exists in real life.  I just will not waste my time that way.


I can very much relate to situation here.  What you dealing with is not to far different from my experience with kyra when we first started to develop our relationship.  Keeping emotions in check was indeed the hard part... Until we actually met.  Now it's dealing with the emotions is a long-distance sitution. 

I can only suggest that once you meet and you validate the connection that you are so sure is their already.  Be prepared for a rush of ups and downs.  My only advice is to focuse on the longer term goals of being together and not forget to find ways to enjoy each other even at a distance.



afeathr -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (6/29/2006 12:56:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: KatyLied

Well, to put it in the simplest terms, no man will be my "Master" until I decide he is. And it certainly won't happen before I meet him. You can possibly use your rule of obedience as a litmus test. But you may miss a good match. People proceed at their own pace. I will agree that at some point there must be an end game to the on-line nonsense and a decision to meet needs to happen. You can set up what you feel is a reasonable timeline of progression....pm to email to chat to talk, etc. and let the prospective know that this is what you expect. I don't think that's asking for too much if you are interested in someone.


This is completely true for me as well.  I had several men interested in Domming me until I chose my current (and hopefully only) Dom.  I knew on our first face-to-face that I wanted to kneel for him, but I needed that meeting to know it.  Otherwise, I would have been questioning my sanity forever.  We had talked off and on for several weeks before that, and he always leads the pace of our relationship.  I wanted it that way, and still do - no matter how frustrating it may be for me.  I like to know that we are where we are because He wants it that way, taking away the uncertainty.  Woman have a tendency to want to move faster than men do anyway, so reining myself in (no matter how difficult that is) prevents me from overstepping my boundaries.  Just when I think maybe things are out of kilter, they fall back together again.  I just have to be patient... not my greatest virtue, but necessary in my relationship with Sir.



Caretakr -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (6/29/2006 3:40:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: zumala

How do you figure that, Caretakr?  Couldn't the faker simply have a pretty girl hold said object and take a picture of her?  Maybe a wanker uses his pretty sister as a model?  Nothing can ever be 100% 'proven' online.  You're still left with the choice of believing or disbelieving.
 
zuma


Yes, but most will simply evaporate before going to that much of an effort.



feastie -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (6/29/2006 4:47:01 PM)

If someone were to email me here today, then venture into IM or whatever...and then tell me that I had two weeks to meet him face to face...

I'd take him for a fake, for an inconsiderate jackass and I would shitcan him.

Why?  Because I am a 24/7 mom.  I am the only parent my children have.  I owe to them to make sure what I'm doing and who I'm meeting is SAFE.  I am certainly in no position to be hopping a plane to meet someone for coffee, financially or within my living arrangements.  Heck, I still haven't convinced the grandparents to keep Thing One and Thing Two so that I can go to Oklahoma in October...and that's for the sugar art show. 

I don't KNOW if I'm going to want to meet someone at all that quick.  I've done it before, found myself having lunch with a child molestor. 

Yeah, two weeks is, for me, garbage.  It should be a play it by ear thing, to me.

But that's for me.  If you think it's gonna weed out who ya don't want, then go for it.  But I see where you could just easily be weeding out someone with whom you really might have had a chance. 



Noah -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (6/29/2006 7:42:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: feastie

If someone were to email me here today, then venture into IM or whatever...and then tell me that I had two weeks to meet him face to face...

I'd take him for a fake, for an inconsiderate jackass and I would shitcan him.

Why?  Because I am a 24/7 mom.  I am the only parent my children have.  I owe to them to make sure what I'm doing and who I'm meeting is SAFE.  I am certainly in no position to be hopping a plane to meet someone for coffee, financially or within my living arrangements.  Heck, I still haven't convinced the grandparents to keep Thing One and Thing Two so that I can go to Oklahoma in October...and that's for the sugar art show. 

I don't KNOW if I'm going to want to meet someone at all that quick.  I've done it before, found myself having lunch with a child molestor. 

Yeah, two weeks is, for me, garbage.  It should be a play it by ear thing, to me.

But that's for me.  If you think it's gonna weed out who ya don't want, then go for it.  But I see where you could just easily be weeding out someone with whom you really might have had a chance. 


Some nice points, Feastie,

In defense of the original poster against a few of the responders, I don't read his suggestion as an imposition of a rule upon others. Yes it has clear implications for those he meets but I read him as suggesting this as a rule-of-thumb that he and other like-minded people could follow themselves. And well within their rights.

I think I may have posted to Merc&beths old thread about this. I've read lots of their stuff before and since and I think they seem to be cool, interesting, worthwhile people. In regard to them I would take this proposed rule in the context of a lot of other things and not conclude that the notion of the rule indicates shallowness in them. Not at all.

Some other posters who speak in favor of this kind of notion strike me ( I know less about them and I could be wrong) as having a kind of meat-market, almost ruthless efficiency attitude. I see this as related to the "numbers game" approach that so many people recommend here, which I admit I look down on. Please note that I am looking down on the approach, not the people... mostly.

For me, like you, Feastie, two weeks is nothing in particular. I have met with people within a day or two of encountering them online and I have met with people after literally years of online acquaintanceship. There was never a case where one turned out to be other than what she said she was. The prospect of "fakes," based on my experience, just doesn't worry me.

I may encounter someone who has no interest--for one reason or another--in meeting me or anyone else this month. That's cool. I may not either. If this person interests me for any of a number of reasons--including the unlikely prospect of one day hooking up--I'm happy to get acquainted, share some laughs, some questions and some insights. I don't see that all as "wasted investment" or "costs" which are "lost" if I don't end up meeting them soon and maybe tying them to something eventually.

An e-mail exchange, a phone call, an IM chat, each one is a thing which can be perfectly worthwhile in itself. The pleasure I take in it or the insights I gain fully reward me for the time and effort.

I have a busy life offline, and great friends there, and existing kinky relationships. I'm not going to dedicate a huge chunk of my time to anyone in particular beyond those who are already getting a chunk, but I'll try to have fun with or learn from anyone who seems worthwhile--whether or not anybody wants to share a booth in a coffee shop this month.

When I was not in a primary committed relationship my broad range of acquaintances, newer and older, only enriched my life. This was irrespective of the fact that I only eventually met a certain number of them. God knows that about a jillion of them didn't manage to hold my interest for all of two weeks. I suspect it was usually mutual. For my part, I'm glad I didn't pull the plug on anyone after two or three weeks, just for the sake of getting on with the business of evaluating the next "items".

I say that if the two-week rule sounds great to you, run with it. Refer to it in your profile. Someone is going to be compatible with that and if you're proceeding with integrity I wish you both nothing but the best.

If someone is having a big or chronic problem attracting "fakes" it might be something other than his meeting schedule that can stand re-vamping. Tune the presentation; tune the radar; be a little more brutally honest with yourself and/or tenderly honest with those you encounter ... I'm not sure what but maybe something.







DelRey -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (6/30/2006 2:36:26 PM)

Wow, I can't believe this thread is still going.

Noah is 100% right.  I do not force my "2 week" Rule down anyone’s throat. It is my gage that is all.

Since I have instituted the rule I have to tell you life in looking for my partner to be has gotten easier. Now I said my life, I didn't say it has brought me any more success in finding her. I can also say when using the rule I catch my self  cutting things shorter than I normally would have and in other cases I have allowed the time frame to go over to see one way or the other if things were going to develop. So its not a rule in concrete I flex it to the situation. But I do keep a conscious eye on it.

Is it working ? like I said, it has saved me a lot of mental masturbation and verbal gymnastics. With that being said, she is NOT at my feet yet...





bignipples2share -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (6/30/2006 6:45:14 PM)

To the point of the thread only, not to any one person.

I only go by how comfortable I feel with a person, before I meet them. No time lines at all and I don't care if they're 20 minutes down the road either.
I choose not to go to munches, it's not my thing. I don't care to meet tons of people and have everyone know my business.
I only look online for those who are local to me, so that meeting is easier, when meeting is how it should end up. I'm not from this area, again, I don't want everyone knowing my business and I don't intend to meet every person who contacts me. There's some nutcases out there and I've had the displeasure of meeting one of them online and he lives in my area.
I'm looking for specific things, and this is why I'm online looking for them and for those in my area. I'm not going to a bar or whatever and asking all the guys who hit on me, if they'd be willing to x y and z.
I did meet one person offline locally, we hit it off fine but were into very different things. If we had met online origionally, we would have found out much quicker that we weren't a match. He's looking online for local people as well.
A two week time frame is just not realistic, even if they live down the road. If I'd done that, I'd probably be victim to that one whacko already. I'd also consider someone with a set time frame to be just interested in casual sex.
If that's all I were looking for, I'd already be doing that.
I use this forum to obtain information about people who I'm actually interested in, or who are interested in me. I'm not into a long distance relatoinship and don't even want to go there. One of the things I gauge things on is, if I can't steer him away from tying to cyber me within minutes, then I know we're not a match and there's a good chance he's just a wanker and his wife is probably just out shopping.
Good post Padriag
And good luck Crappy Dom
________________________
ahhhh I see sounds



Tamerofwild1s -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (6/30/2006 10:36:27 PM)

I may set a rules down for a slave to follow ... ONLY . if a dynamic is starting to form

I have read the "rules" that are mention in here but I think with the internet there needs to be some flexability in the said rule of thumb. Me personally I use a variant of said rule

1. find someone whose profile intersts me and sparks the interest .... and send them an e-mail telling them so and why
2. converse if a spark is created thru IM's and e-mails
3. if the spark seems to be igniting within the 2 week period I take things to phone calls. keep the talking going and listen very intently to how they things . see if their attention is on me and mine on them ... if this all goes well I move to step 4
 
4. within a 2 week period or whatever is agreed upon I shoot for 2 weeks but hey yours can vary ... I want to meet .. I am a creature of physicality I need to know if the chemistry is there in a one on one real time situation.
 
now if for some reason she can't make it and asks to reschedule our meeting I will . If i see a habit of rescheduling coming on . well then I suggest that our connection might not be all it's shakin up to be and suggest being friends lame or not thats just me
 
this seems to work for me . maybe not for everyone but it works . and again the rules she must abide by .. are there only once the dynamic has been established where she expresses a deep desire to serve me.
 
we all have our different ways <shrugs> I guesstheres an alternative to everything [;)]



HouseofBear -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (7/1/2006 8:01:02 AM)

We find MercnBeth's suggestion interesting.  It is easy in relationships developing on line to become involved in the "romantic" aspects and to become attached (or maybe it would be better to say have become very hopeful emotionally about the results when you meet) from your discussions online.  The unfortunate aspect to this is when you finally meet and find the person is nothing at all like you expected.  That is one reason we make it clear that we will not offer a collar online or even accept someone asking for one until we have had several chances to talk together face to face.  We do realize however, that due to different individuals circumstances a meeting within two weeks is not always possible.  However, we do feel it should be done as soon as possible.

Bear and Ursa



untamedshysub -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (7/4/2006 3:15:30 PM)

it took me a little over a year and that was after walking away from him three times to meet. lol two weeks no way not for me but I have kids and not only myself to think about .



findmedaddy -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (7/4/2006 3:40:42 PM)

Well, I have only myself to think about, no kids, and I too would bypass the profile of someone who would eliminate me on the basis of a two-week deadline. Why? Because I am looking for a real, lasting relationship with a real person, not life as a movie set. This is somebody with whom I'll commiserate about whose turn it is to get the oil changed in the car and what's for dinner, somebody who'll be a little disappointed if I have to go out of town for a few days on business and who I'll miss just as much, someone who will want more than anything to see me come to no harm (and vice versa). A man who is willing to risk my safety and my emotional well being by setting such a deadline simply doesn't fit my *own* definition of "real."



mnottertail -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (7/4/2006 3:54:28 PM)

There will be no commiseration whatsoever; get on your cam and change oil now!!!!

Master

LOL...scairt you, huh?  



Mercnbeth -> RE: **New Rule** Keeps fakes at bay... (7/5/2006 11:16:01 AM)

quote:

We find MercnBeth's suggestion interesting.  It is easy in relationships developing on line to become involved in the "romantic" aspects and to become attached (or maybe it would be better to say have become very hopeful emotionally about the results when you meet) from your discussions online.  The unfortunate aspect to this is when you finally meet and find the person is nothing at all like you expected.


Bear's House,

Someone pointed out to use this weekend that this thread had been recycled. The focus on the "two week" aspect is misdirected. It's an arbitrary date to express the point that people seeking a physical, in person, relationship that may or may not result in a long term relationship should meet as soon as possible. The same day there is a mutual interest expressed. "Two weeks" was introduced because it's a reasonable time for arrangements and schedules to accommodate a meeting. Although it wasn't the most ideal of circumstances, I managed to meet a couple people who were from out of state under this criteria. I can't believe that my charm and/or convincing skills, or my full disclosure of personal information and/or references gave me any unique opportunities. I knew what I wanted. I knew no aspect of what I wanted could be fulfilled through the internet. I knew my counterpart wouldn't either. I didn't expect everyone I met to become my slave or even my submissive. But I knew I wouldn't find out if they were or not through the internet or through fantasy game playing and mutual masturbation.


A "meeting", NOT playing, NOT going to a lifestyle event, NOT having sex by any definition, and NOT performing. Two weeks is a sufficient time to exchange information to make each other comfortable. It's enough time to discuss the concepts of each other's "ideal" partner. It's enough time to discover "deal breaker" and "deal maker" traits about the other.

A time constraint sets parameters. It lends support to the legitimacy of wanting a relationship that is based more upon actual first hand knowledge of another, not the fantasy image that they can portray as a disconnected IM pop up. It reduces the time wasted with people who have "misunderstanding" spouses or significant others. Most important it reduces the chances of getting "emotionally attached" with a personality or character who in reality doesn't exist.

Will you lose out on some opportunities having this sort of deadline? Not in my opinion. Not from the perspective that both people seek an real life partner. Allegedly that's what the majority of people who post profiles seek. Why delay the process indefinitely? What would be the reason a person, seeking a real life partner, wouldn't agree to a casual meeting quickly assuming all safety issues were addressed?

Are people to have long ongoing internet based relationships "fakes"? Personally I wouldn't have used that word. I would use a reference to "time wasters". I didn't want to waste time or go down a path that 6 months down the road, when all the other "arguments" were addressed, and budding emotions were established, that the "REAL" argument for not meeting came to light.



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875