|
shallowdeep -> RE: Lame posts: "No, I'm not into that. Sorry" Why bother? (1/28/2010 12:15:02 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: VaguelyCurious
You've taken the time to respond carefully and thoughtfully to this thread. You have thereby excluded yourself from the group of subs who are the problem this thread is discussing-subs 'like you' aren't the issue here
Well, thank you. However, I'm not convinced I am all that different a case from the lurkers who are supposed to be reaping educational benefits. I didn't start lurking here with an innate ability to see things through the eyes of dominant women, and I'm sure I had my share of misconceptions. I like to think I've learned a bit since then, but the point I was trying to make is that I don't feel the brief and snarky responses to lame posts added much to my learning process. I posted because I felt my experience might add a relevant perspective for women to consider.
quote:
I would suggest that rather than educating them about the general 'acceptedness' of their particular kink, snarking is intended to educate them about the nature of the dominant women on these boards-they don't like being treated like 'shiny new kink-of-the-day vending machine's (great phrase! lol) and they don't like the boards being used in a thinly-veiled attempt to find some kind of service top for a particular kink. Snarking is a theoretically quick and satisfying way of showing that this behaviour is considered unacceptable.
I absolutely agree the education is far more about the nature of dominant women (you mean you're NOT a vending machine?!) than acceptability of kinks. I just don't see the evidence that brief or snarky comments are terribly effective educational tools in practice. To me, something like Akasha's story that I linked earlier is effective. It generates empathy, it leads to realization in a way that doesn't create a defensive response. A thread like "The Over-Fetishization of the Dominant Woman" is effective. It provides a far better chance for understanding, and a deeper understanding, than a snarky one-liner. These sorts of things have been invaluable for me. The snark? Not really; it often doesn't add much of anything beyond what I would have discovered by watching a lame post follow the Titanic off the page in silence. I am operating under the assumption that other subs see it similarly. If that is the case, the rationale Akasha originally presented may not be entirely valid. As many women seemed to simply buy into that rationale, it's something I thought might deserve more discussion.
quote:
I just want to note that the obvious conclusion isn't necessarily the correct one-for example people took a while to respond to Lady Pact's thread on things you don't want to choose between.
You have a point, but I think this board tends to move slowly enough that there is ample opportunity for any interested party to comment. I would actually say LadyPact's thread is an example of that: it got picked up before it dropped of the page. If something does drop off entirely without a bite, it's fairly evident the interest level was low.
quote:
ORIGINAL: LadyPact
From your comment, I think you are, mistakenly, assuming the primary function of this board, is for the benefit of sub males. Many of us do not see it that way.
Sorry if I gave that impression. Akasha had framed this topic in terms of the educational value such responses would provide to subs, which is really the key point I'm rather skeptical about. Others seemed to agree this was a significant part of their motivation in giving a response, so I was simply continuing in that vein. I certainly didn't mean to imply that was the primary purpose of the board, but I thought it was the point under discussion. I hope that clarifies why I framed things as I did.
quote:
Believe it or not, putting a comment out there on a subject that I am not interested in actually drops the drive by mail ratio. Often, what happens when someone new comes around here and starts posting the types of threads that we're discussing here, they will start jumping around the other threads and find the Dommes that post frequently. At that point, they will start mass emailing all of us, often with a repeat of what they asked in the thread they created. The 'head them off at the pass' technique works in this area.
I can definitely see how this rationale makes sense for frequent posters. It was something I had not considered; thank you for the added perspective.
quote:
Each time I stand up and say that isn't what I'm here for, I make a dent in that vending machine mentality.
Perhaps, but this veers into the 'educational value' that I'm still skeptical of. I can accept letting loose might be effective at getting the OP to stop. In persistent cases (e.g. bumping or starting new threads), I allow it may even be the option I would resort to. But does it really put a dent in their mentality? The OP may well scamper off under a hail of righteous indignation, but do they really reflect on it? Do they even understand why they came under attack? Or do they head straight back for the reassuring arms of porn that doesn't talk back? How many return as reformed, intelligent contributors? If they actually are open to learning, I suspect being ignored would be an equally effective lesson that they need to change their approach and mentality. If they're not, it's already a lost cause. It strikes me as spending time tilting at windmills.
quote:
The truth of the matter is that, even if a good number of us reply negatively to a trollish post, the post doesn't stay at the top of the forum that long. More often than not, we get a good laugh.
If this is how most women here view it, that makes perfect sense. Sometimes I think I see more than laughter, though. I get the sense that these things really can grate on some women. Because of that, I wonder if there is potential for a more productive tone that everyone would appreciate if lame posts were more frequently ignored.
This topic seems to have gotten off topic in some rather bizarre ways, so I may try to let it fade, but I wanted to thank you both very much for your responses.
|
|
|
|
