RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes"

RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (Full Version)

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

Message

asianchloe -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/26/2009 9:41:41 PM)
I agree. I know a few who consider themselves professionals but play for free on occasion with clients they like. quote: ORIGINAL: BailyBoo Not all professional Dominants are dollar obsessed. Some people just want to do a job that they love.

asianchloe -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/26/2009 9:43:21 PM)
I don't think anyone thinks pro dommes don't have a right to be here. It seems the problem is that some find it scamming if the fees are not disclosed upfront and others feel it is against TOS if a profile is actively seeking clients. quote: ORIGINAL: MistressRouge Like myself, many Pro Dommes are also lifestyle, so we have a right to be here, as with any other BDSM community :)

asianchloe -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/26/2009 9:46:41 PM)
Someone commented that there aren't that many pros on this site anyway, since anyone looking for money will not find it and move on quickly. I suppose if you were receiving a lot of mail from people who are pros you could list on your profile (or say in a first reply), you are not interested in meeting any Pro-Dommes. If they think they have no chance to converting you to a client, they'll leave you alone. quote: ORIGINAL: CuriousPuppy Personally I just wish CM would give us a checkbox/dropdown to filter out the people who claim to be pro's, it would make everyone's life easier.

asianchloe -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/26/2009 9:49:35 PM)
[sm=LMAO.gif] quote: ORIGINAL: VanessaChaland quote: ORIGINAL: CuriousPuppy Personally I just wish CM would give us a checkbox/dropdown to filter out the people who claim to be pro's, it would make everyone's life easier. Good point. However, we might also need a checkbox/dropdown to filter out : Women who are gold diggers. Men who are married and lying about it. Women who are married and lying about it. Women who want to be married, but lie about it. Doms who part time as subs. Subs who secretly wish to be Doms. Dommes who used to be Doms and the reverse. People who show a profile of a good looking young person, and in reality are much older and fatter. Men who claim 8 inches, but in reality have 5. People who claim to love good wine but actually drink nastyass cheap beer. People who claim they dislike Obamas policy but are actually racist. People who claim they liked Bush's policies but are actually elitists who hated the guy. People who claim they have 76 degrees and make $23590275982734572057240 an hour but actually are high school dropouts and are unemployed (and never have been as Mommy and Daddy pay for everything). And on, and on and on. It would never end. :) [sm=LMAO.gif][sm=LMAO.gif][sm=LMAO.gif][sm=LMAO.gif][sm=LMAO.gif]

VanessaChaland -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/27/2009 12:01:53 AM)
Or could it be that only I deal in reality backed with facts, logic and common sense and those that can't see that or are not willing to admit it are jackasses, lol? :) :) You may see me as negative, others fill my message box with praise and accolades and agree with my thoughts. Are they all wrong and only you are right? Do those with a hyper unrealistic sense of optimisim (cluelessness to some) always prove out to be correct? No, I think not. Oops, does saying "No, I think not" sound negative, lol. :) Cautious realism. Unbridled optimism. Realistic optimism. Experienced negativism. Are you the judge on what is what and which is which and who each should apply too? :) I have all kinds of positive energy and vibes. I also suffer no fools. Those that are living in reality feed off of my positive energy. Perhaps those that are bleating sheep, following the herd, unable to conjure up an original thought of theirr own and can not think outside the box are fools? Not accusing or saying, just asking as you know all. :) quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 quote: ORIGINAL: VanessaChaland I say the color of milk is white. Does that make me an expert? Sure does. I drink a lot of milk. Humorously enough, the error you are making is one called "biased negative sample." You are only seeing certain kinds of people, because you are negative and biased. Put out enough negative vibes, and people with positive energy will choose to avoid you. Then your conclusion is "guaranteed" to be correct, because you see no one in your life who falsifies it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample_bias#Problems_caused_by_a_biased_negative_sample

CuriousPuppy -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/28/2009 11:07:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: asianchloe Someone commented that there aren't that many pros on this site anyway, since anyone looking for money will not find it and move on quickly. I suppose if you were receiving a lot of mail from people who are pros you could list on your profile (or say in a first reply), you are not interested in meeting any Pro-Dommes. If they think they have no chance to converting you to a client, they'll leave you alone. quote: ORIGINAL: CuriousPuppy Personally I just wish CM would give us a checkbox/dropdown to filter out the people who claim to be pro's, it would make everyone's life easier. At one point I set the boxes to female dominants in florida with an interest in sub males, the first page had more people looking for tribute and new clients than not, shortly after I started blocking profiles on anyone mentioning tribute in hopes of being able to use the silly thing. Setting it to looking for male switches is only slightly better since the same tribute seekers typically show up, setting it to male doms funnily enough has an amusingly high percentage of straight guys looking for women with very angry notices warning guys away. You being listed as a female dominant in newyork likely see very few profiles of subs looking for tribute or claiming to lifestyle types looking for "the right client$", I have little doubt that it's a very small problem for you and the other dominant types saying they don't see what the big deal is.

asianchloe -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/28/2009 6:09:54 PM)
I think that's just called a plain old ho. quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 As a related followup, when I logged in this morning, the profile at the top of my homepage was that of a submissive woman whose master was renting her out for X dollars a week. I've seen far more of this type of profile than a year ago. I haven't written any of them. My suspicion, though, is that most are fake... but some are real. Sign of the times.

asianchloe -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/28/2009 6:15:55 PM)
With that analogy, I don't think you understand the concept of warranted assertibility. You can read a book or take your advice and google it. quote: ORIGINAL: VanessaChaland I say the color of milk is white. Does that make me an expert? Sure does. I drink a lot of milk. If someone wishes to dispute my assertions as to the color of milk, thats their right. Am I going to spend hours providing them with links to sites that provide information about the color of milk? No, I am not. Some things in life are obvious to the majority of people that are able to reason and use some common sense. For anyone else, they need to Goggle it. I have other things to do. :) quote: ORIGINAL: asianchloe I'm with you. If someone wants to speak like an expert, bring on the supporting evidence. And no, I don't think telling people to "google it" themselves counts. quote: ORIGINAL: kidwithknife quote: ORIGINAL: VanessaChaland Yea, right, whatever. The laws of averages and numbers prove otherwise. You have actual statistics on this?

asianchloe -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/28/2009 6:25:27 PM)
It started with moderator16 sending me messages that rudely implied I was not "following guidelines". I asked him/her another question by message and did not receive an answer, just another exact warning I would be kicked off the board. So, I decided to ask the board for clarification. The general consensus is that no one really cares that people are violating the TOS (by advertising services in this instance), except for moderator16 who seemed to single me out, rudely address me and then ignore me when I asked a sincere question. S/he seemed to be acting on a power trip and just wanted to chastise me for not behaving. That kind of treatment is acceptable to someone who had decided to be in a subservient or submissive position but is just rude and ill-mannered otherwise. I pointed this out and of course, got no reply let alone an apology. My other comments on this thread had less to do with tributes when the topic veered into another direction (and into generalizations about socioeconomics, psychology of sex workers, or ethics in general). Also, I'm new so half my total post count is not so many. quote: ORIGINAL: VanessaChaland Just curious asianchloe, nearly half of your total post count is on this thread. Why is it that the issue of "money" (tribute, tips, scams, whatever) is of such great interest to you? :)

asianchloe -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/28/2009 6:30:41 PM)
I find Redmagic's logic to be more compelling and straightforward. Your response is a bit of a rant (which is not objectionable, but not really a response of "fact, logic and common sense"). Just my humble opinion. quote: ORIGINAL: VanessaChaland Or could it be that only I deal in reality backed with facts, logic and common sense and those that can't see that or are not willing to admit it are jackasses, lol? :) :) You may see me as negative, others fill my message box with praise and accolades and agree with my thoughts. Are they all wrong and only you are right? Do those with a hyper unrealistic sense of optimisim (cluelessness to some) always prove out to be correct? No, I think not. Oops, does saying "No, I think not" sound negative, lol. :) Cautious realism. Unbridled optimism. Realistic optimism. Experienced negativism. Are you the judge on what is what and which is which and who each should apply too? :) I have all kinds of positive energy and vibes. I also suffer no fools. Those that are living in reality feed off of my positive energy. Perhaps those that are bleating sheep, following the herd, unable to conjure up an original thought of theirr own and can not think outside the box are fools? Not accusing or saying, just asking as you know all. :) quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 quote: ORIGINAL: VanessaChaland I say the color of milk is white. Does that make me an expert? Sure does. I drink a lot of milk. Humorously enough, the error you are making is one called "biased negative sample." You are only seeing certain kinds of people, because you are negative and biased. Put out enough negative vibes, and people with positive energy will choose to avoid you. Then your conclusion is "guaranteed" to be correct, because you see no one in your life who falsifies it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample_bias#Problems_caused_by_a_biased_negative_sample

RedMagic1 -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/28/2009 9:11:30 PM)
Asianchloe, there are two different "sides" to the site: the CollarMe profiles, and the CollarChat message boards. The Moderators have power only on the message boards; Admin/Support handles the profile side. In particular, Moderator 16 is responsible to prevent violations of TOS in posts. Mentioning usernames without permission of the user is such a violation. There are far more profiles (and changes to profiles) than there is message board traffic. A small handful of volunteers runs the entire site. There is no way to check profiles "by hand." That is why there is an automated reporting process to report scammer profiles. I sent you a mail a few days ago about this thread, and you deleted it unread. Did you know it was from me? I'm betting the answer is "No." It probably ended up in your bulk folder, and you deleted it along with 1,000 other things. Profile checking is the same way. The volume is just too great to do a manual filter.

RedMagic1 -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/28/2009 9:14:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: asianchloe With that analogy, I don't think you understand the concept of warranted assertibility. OMG that's hot!

WyldHrt -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/29/2009 1:23:28 AM)
With all due respect, Vanessa (and all), please trim your quotes. We're already reading and don't need a rehash of the whole to-do every time you add something, thanks. quote: except for moderator16 who seemed to single me out, rudely address me and then ignore me when I asked a sincere question. S/he seemed to be acting on a power trip and just wanted to chastise me for not behaving. Ummm... do you really not know what a moderator is? Sixteen didn't single you out, you got the same response anyone else here does when they break TOS. On that note, believe it or not, we are all "users" as far as the Mods are concerned. Your self-appointed "D" status doesn't get you special treatment, nor require the mods to handle you with kid gloves when you fuck up. Clue-by-four: this is a private board, the rules of which are enforced by the moderators. If you are seeing a plethora of gold in your inbox, you might want to think about why, because it has nothing to do with being "picked on" by the mods. quote: That kind of treatment is acceptable to someone who had decided to be in a subservient or submissive position but is just rude and ill-mannered otherwise. This cracks me up, really. I'd elaborate, but I promised 16 that I would be good for awhile, lol.

VanessaChaland -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/29/2009 1:53:56 AM)
If you already know you read most of a quoted thread, why would you read it a second time? I mean somethings are kind of obvious,,, to most. :) quote: ORIGINAL: WyldHrt With all due respect, Vanessa (and all), please trim your quotes. We're already reading and don't need a rehash of the whole to-do every time you add something, thanks. quote: except for moderator16 who seemed to single me out, rudely address me and then ignore me when I asked a sincere question. S/he seemed to be acting on a power trip and just wanted to chastise me for not behaving. Ummm... do you really not know what a moderator is? Sixteen didn't single you out, you got the same response anyone else here does when they break TOS. On that note, believe it or not, we are all "users" as far as the Mods are concerned. Your self-appointed "D" status doesn't get you special treatment, nor require the mods to handle you with kid gloves when you fuck up. Clue-by-four: this is a private board, the rules of which are enforced by the moderators. If you are seeing a plethora of gold in your inbox, you might want to think about why, because it has nothing to do with being "picked on" by the mods. quote: That kind of treatment is acceptable to someone who had decided to be in a subservient or submissive position but is just rude and ill-mannered otherwise. This cracks me up, really. I'd elaborate, but I promised 16 that I would be good for awhile, lol.

WyldHrt -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/29/2009 5:11:12 AM)
You mean obvious like the fact that nested quotes are a waste of bandwidth that tends to annoy the mods and indicates that a poster is too lazy to simply quote what they are replying to? Got the memo, thanks. BTW: quote: You may see me as negative, others fill my message box with praise and accolades and agree with my thoughts You are female with big tits. Your message box would be filled with praise and accolades and those agreeing with your thoughts even if you listed "drowning puppies" under your favourite hobbies. Welcome to CM, lol.

asianchloe -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/29/2009 6:04:32 PM)
I do apologize for the deleted unread email. As you can tell I'm new to both the site and the message board. I specifically list I am looking for women (and women only) on my profile, I kept getting generic offers from male slaves all over the world bothering me with their cut-and-paste messages. So, I put all messages from men in my bulk folder. Yours probably got placed there. I figure, if someone wants to contact me because of something I posted, they can post on that thread (which I do check and respond to). quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic I sent you a mail a few days ago about this thread, and you deleted it unread. Did you know it was from me? I'm betting the answer is "No." It probably ended up in your bulk folder, and you deleted it along with 1,000 other things.

asianchloe -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/29/2009 6:09:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WyldHrt Ummm... do you really not know what a moderator is? Sixteen didn't single you out, you got the same response anyone else here does when they break TOS. Ummm...do you know what singled out means? I was specifically called out on certain behavior then when I said "hey so and so are also doing it, I didn't realize it was violating TOS" I got no response. Not, "that's a difference case because...." Not, "I'll look into it since I'm a fair and consistent mod". I got no meaningful response, just a reiteration of the original message. quote: ORIGINAL: WyldHrt Clue-by-four: this is a private board, the rules of which are enforced by the moderators. If you are seeing a plethora of gold in your inbox, you might want to think about why, because it has nothing to do with being "picked on" by the mods. If you think two gold messages counts as a plethora, you need to learn to improve your math skills. I didn't say I was being picked on, I said I was treated rudely. Are you quoting yourself?

SirJ40 -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/29/2009 8:20:15 PM)
I find it interesting that the title line and only real information in one of the "loudest" poster's profiles is an ad for a fetish furniture maker. Not saying anything other than it's interesting. Isn't making custom furniture a service, offered by a business? And that would make that profile an advertisement, wouldn't it? NAH, can't be. I must be misinterpreting something.

VanessaChaland -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/30/2009 12:41:01 AM)
I find it interesting that you are not able to see that I do not make and sell custom furniture. So yes you are misinterpreting and very confused. quote: ORIGINAL: SirJ40 I find it interesting that the title line and only real information in one of the "loudest" poster's profiles is an ad for a fetish furniture maker. Not saying anything other than it's interesting. Isn't making custom furniture a service, offered by a business? And that would make that profile an advertisement, wouldn't it? NAH, can't be. I must be misinterpreting something.

WyldHrt -> RE: question about "scams" vs "tributes" (3/30/2009 12:55:07 AM)
quote: Ummm...do you know what singled out means? I was specifically called out on certain behavior then when I said "hey so and so are also doing it, I didn't realize it was violating TOS" I got no response. Not, "that's a difference case because...." Not, "I'll look into it since I'm a fair and consistent mod". I got no meaningful response, just a reiteration of the original message. So, you aren't getting the personal service you paid for when you joined? Shocking.[8\|] This is a free board, Chloe, and the mods here are volunteers who do this on their own time. Given the rowdy nature of this group and the mod/member ratio, I'm surprised that they have time to cmail more than "Bad perv, no cookie!" when members break TOS, let alone give detailed explanations. quote: If you think two gold messages counts as a plethora, you need to learn to improve your math skills. I said "IF" you are seeing a plethora, yes? As I'm neither a mod nor you, I have no way of knowing how many gold messages you have received. quote: I didn't say I was being picked on, I said I was treated rudely. Are you quoting yourself? My mistake. Here I thought being "singled out" and "treated rudely" was pretty much the definition of being picked on. [8\|] The quotes were sarcastic, apologies if they confused you. With that, I'm done derailing this thread. If you wish to continue, feel free to mail me on the other side.

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875