RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money?

RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity

Message

Lockit -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 12:56:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: udaboss quote: ORIGINAL: Lockit quote: ORIGINAL: udaboss In response to Lockit: Doesn't surprise me at all. But you're making my point. I said "at least" half the males on CM were subs and was told, no, it's much less than that. I am counting from MO alone and yes many nicks are dark blue... some should be light blue. Then we have the multiple accounts by the same person. The numbers could never be counted or add up to anything of worth. And why is this the only thing I said that you address? Why just Missouri? CM has user profiles from all over the world. Good lord you are being dense. You supposedly read my profile, how many times? I am looking for local only. I don't do long distance because I have and it doesn't work for me. I want a hard or soft body, right here where I can get at him. Duh.... I don't care what the rest of the world is doing... just whats going on in my lil world.

udaboss -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 12:56:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: udaboss Do a text search. MALES --ORIENTATION: any THEY ARE SEEKING: any Do it on the basis of both "LAST ON" and "JOINED." See how many are light blue and how many are dark blue. 'nuff said I was curious, so I did it. At best, you have Me by a 5% margin of error. For My location (within 100 miles) and the age parameter that I set: Last on - 65% Dom and 35% sub. Joining date - 68% Dom and 32% sub. Keep in mind that anybody checking the seeking "friends" would show up here. Also, these numbers include all sexual orientations, so those who are gay are still in the percentiles. Sorry, no way. Or you somehow got a result totally different from mine. Joined (and this shouldn't change significantly for a few hours) first page -- 9 doms 16 subs. For reference, subboy 7330 was at the top.

udaboss -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 12:58:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lockit quote: ORIGINAL: udaboss quote: ORIGINAL: Lockit quote: ORIGINAL: udaboss In response to Lockit: Doesn't surprise me at all. But you're making my point. I said "at least" half the males on CM were subs and was told, no, it's much less than that. I am counting from MO alone and yes many nicks are dark blue... some should be light blue. Then we have the multiple accounts by the same person. The numbers could never be counted or add up to anything of worth. And why is this the only thing I said that you address? Why just Missouri? CM has user profiles from all over the world. Good lord you are being dense. You supposedly read my profile, how many times? I am looking for local only. I don't do long distance because I have and it doesn't work for me. I want a hard or soft body, right here where I can get at him. Duh.... I don't care what the rest of the world is doing... just whats going on in my lil world. That's not what this thread is about. It's about a CM feature to filter out dommes who are here for money.

VaguelyCurious -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 12:59:55 PM)
FR: Earlier in the thread, one of the anteaters (I forget which) said they do not want other people to make up their minds for them. Wouldn't a ratings feature be a really bad thing from that point of view?

MissAsylum -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 1:01:00 PM)
getting rude disgusting remarks after sending a polite, "no thank you"- minimum of 6 times a week. getting the same copy/paste message from the same user and/or new profile of the same person that ends in rude remarks- at least 10 times a month.

BoiJen -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 1:04:11 PM)
Alright 4 individuals who can say that would expect low rating solely on the basis of a polite "no thank you" anymore?

udaboss -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 1:04:56 PM)
Gotta go folks. Stuff to do. Maybe I'll check back in tomorrow.

sappatoti -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 1:05:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: udaboss quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: udaboss Do a text search. MALES --ORIENTATION: any THEY ARE SEEKING: any Do it on the basis of both "LAST ON" and "JOINED." See how many are light blue and how many are dark blue. 'nuff said I was curious, so I did it. At best, you have Me by a 5% margin of error. For My location (within 100 miles) and the age parameter that I set: Last on - 65% Dom and 35% sub. Joining date - 68% Dom and 32% sub. Keep in mind that anybody checking the seeking "friends" would show up here. Also, these numbers include all sexual orientations, so those who are gay are still in the percentiles. Sorry, no way. Or you somehow got a result totally different from mine. Joined (and this shouldn't change significantly for a few hours) first page -- 9 doms 16 subs. For reference, subboy 7330 was at the top. To throw another wrinkle into all of this... I'm using a computer/browser combination, apparently, that doesn't work with the sort criteria of "Joined." If I use that sort, my results come up as a "no matches" type of response. The only sort criteria that works for me is "Last On." My point here is, this site is based upon software written specifically for the Microsoft IIS line of server software. It is NOT 100% compatible with non-Windows operating systems and non-Microsoft browsers (perhaps not even 100% compatible WITH Microsoft browsers). Thus, some features may or may not work for every user on this site. Adding additional categories and hoping the users are honest enough to use them is a great idea, but the whole thing falls apart when someone creates a profile, or writes a message or post, or performs searches when this site is not compatible with what the user is using for equipment and software. So, argue all you'd like about whether a feature would be useful or not. Just remember that the results of those features may not be as you expect due to the number of users using somewhat incompatible systems.

VaguelyCurious -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 1:06:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BoiJen anymore? Oooh, me! I don't do polite refusals any more-I just block and delete now... (Of course then they sometimes use secondary profiles to complain that I've blocked their primary ones...)

LadyPact -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 1:07:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: udaboss quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact I was curious, so I did it. At best, you have Me by a 5% margin of error. For My location (within 100 miles) and the age parameter that I set: Last on - 65% Dom and 35% sub. Joining date - 68% Dom and 32% sub. Keep in mind that anybody checking the seeking "friends" would show up here. Also, these numbers include all sexual orientations, so those who are gay are still in the percentiles. Sorry, no way. Or you somehow got a result totally different from mine. Joined (and this shouldn't change significantly for a few hours) first page -- 9 doms 16 subs. For reference, subboy 7330 was at the top. You are either using a different location or age bracket than I am. The person that you reference isn't even on My list. Are you searching CA?

MissAsylum -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 1:08:59 PM)
i'm not too keen on being put in the same catagory as a 1980s prom dress or a vintage steamtrunk. but thats just me.

Lockit -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 1:10:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: udaboss That's not what this thread is about. It's about a CM feature to filter out dommes who are here for money. ROFL... So about now, you tag me for going off topic? Funny that! The conversation went to numbers which would be something that address's your first post and you question why I would only look at MO. which is where I live and still has a bit to do with where we both live and those that sign up at this site and then you call foul on me because I respond to your question? Dude... lol Simple fact is, your original op doesn't make a lot of sense because people lie! lol Yes.. they lie, they create multiple profiles sometimes from lots of locations and these are the real flesh and blood persons who live locally and piss people off and then come back at them with a new profile. In the course of acting an adult and weeding through what I don't expect anyone else to do for me... I have a number of questions about certain profiles. You don't see me starting threads about them.

LadyPact -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 1:11:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BoiJen Alright 4 individuals who can say that would expect low rating solely on the basis of a polite "no thank you" anymore? Might as well add Me to that. Considering that I block anyone who isn't from the forums or near My location, I'm sure to have pissed off a lot of people.

BoiJen -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 1:14:39 PM)
So now we're up to 6 folks who get nasty stuff for being polite. Really? Someone expects CM to be able to efficiently and effectively use a rating tool?

SorceressJ -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 1:18:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BoiJen 1. All the Dommes reading, if you've gotten at least one nasty message from a polite "No, thank you", please say so. 2. If it's happened more than once, please say so. 3. If you've gotten the nasty stuff from one profile, said "no thank you" and then two months later gotten the same form letter AGAIN, please say so. boi 1. Yes. 2. Yes. More than once from the same person/username, even. Not only that, I have received the same word-for-word message from the same user having made themselves a different profile. 3. Yes. At the risk of violating TOS, I will of course not name any names, but I am veritably certain that a username I've seen here today looks remarkably familiar in this regard. It went like this: first came the nasty response, then after I blocked him, the repeat visits so I would see him in my "Who's Viewing Me?" section (was this intended to impress?). Finding himself ignored, he got bored and went away, as good trolls do. Fortunately, when he visited my profile this time, he had gained enough gray cells to recognize me and say nothing. Thank you for that. Big Smile!

sappatoti -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 1:40:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BoiJen So now we're up to 6 folks who get nasty stuff for being polite. Really? Someone expects CM to be able to efficiently and effectively use a rating tool? While I've not received nasty responses lately, I have had my fair share of those who just can't seem to grasp the concept of "No means NO." I've had to put a few on "block, hide, and delete" lately.

dbloomer -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 1:41:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SorceressJ quote: ORIGINAL: BoiJen 1. All the Dommes reading, if you've gotten at least one nasty message from a polite "No, thank you", please say so. 2. If it's happened more than once, please say so. 3. If you've gotten the nasty stuff from one profile, said "no thank you" and then two months later gotten the same form letter AGAIN, please say so. boi 1. Yes. 2. Yes. More than once from the same person/username, even. Not only that, I have received the same word-for-word message from the same user having made themselves a different profile. 3. Yes. At the risk of violating TOS, I will of course not name any names, but I am veritably certain that a username I've seen here today looks remarkably familiar in this regard. It went like this: first came the nasty response, then after I blocked him, the repeat visits so I would see him in my "Who's Viewing Me?" section (was this intended to impress?). Finding himself ignored, he got bored and went away, as good trolls do. Fortunately, when he visited my profile this time, he had gained enough gray cells to recognize me and say nothing. Thank you for that. Big Smile! The fact that you didn't point the finger at anyone specifically leaves everyone free to point their finger and believe what they want to, which I'm sure you knew. Now anyone who disagrees with you on any subject is "That guy who was rude to you in a private message." Clever. Add e-mail verification to Collarme and you'll see the amount of abuse around here reduced dramatically. Ask yourself why practically every other community website out there requires e-mail validation, but Collarme.com doesn't. This more than anything is the #1 problem here. The reason they don't require e-mail verification is the same reason they don't implement the system we're advocating here of recognizing accounts as professional femdoms. It will widdle down the userbase THAT much more, reducing the profitability of this place even further. I will be withdrawing from this thread. Nobody wants to address the core issue. Instead, they want to burn the OP at the stake and pat eachother on the back, with some strange gang mentality. As a final note, you might ask yourself WHY you receive so many angry posts from sub men looking for dommes, and you might consider the possibiltiy that a better system for maching subs with doms may actually result in more suitable matches for YOU, and a much happier inbox.

sirsholly -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 1:48:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella [ Reading his profile, it seems he already is a Dom. He's pretty clear in telling his sub how he plans on running the household. quote: The man is to keep the house clean, cook, and do whatever errands or other duties he is directed to do by the female. The man is not even permitted to leave the house without the female's permission. That's just the way things are going to be. . This is called marriage.

LadyPact -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 2:12:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dbloomer As a final note, you might ask yourself WHY you receive so many angry posts from sub men looking for dommes, and you might consider the possibiltiy that a better system for maching subs with doms may actually result in more suitable matches for YOU, and a much happier inbox. You seriously don't get it, which, I happen to think is why you didn't address the post of My response earlier about having actual concern for My own sub (followed by sub male friends) on this site. Not all of us are here for matches. The concerns of the seeking really aren't Mine. The quagmire of the problems of the other side really don't effect Me. It's not going to change what happens in My mail box. Not the folks who don't read profiles. Not the folks who are looking for online only. Not the folks who write Me from the other side of the globe. What I think is being forgotten here is, even if flagging was implemented, that doesn't necessarily mean that every sub out there is going to find a lifestyle Domme that is actually interested in having a dynamic with him. Finding a match on this site is no different than it is anywhere else. Being on the internet doesn't change the fact that some folks aren't going to find what they are looking for because there isn't another party who wants to share a dynamic with them. Even if every pro was flagged on this site, the fact that some people will not find what they are looking for isn't going to change.

Tantriqu -> RE: Couldn't CM Have a Category for Dommes Who Aren't After Money? (8/3/2010 2:15:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BoiJen 1. All the Dommes reading, if you've gotten at least one nasty message from a polite "No, thank you", please say so. 2. If it's happened more than once, please say so. 3. If you've gotten the nasty stuff from one profile, said "no thank you" and then two months later gotten the same form letter AGAIN, please say so. boi 1. Hella yes, dozens of different ones, yet each with uniquely detailed threats of prolonged physical torture, sexual and other mutilation, forced pregnancy/prostitution/rape/sodomy, and death. Christ, put them all together, and you've got a Margaret Atwood novel! So, as someone mentioned above, I've stopped giving polite 'no, thanks', and just block and delete unless the message is from a male sub. Life's too short to read sociopathic ravings and /or unsolicited Aspbergeric flames from comp-sci types poisoned by vanilla-porn-fuelled impossiblities. 2. Hella yes, and also as someone mentioned above, frequently hidden under a new profile. Male switches, doms and female subs posting 'on behalf of their dom' are the foulest-mouthed. Ai yai yai. Dommes just tend to be verbal bullies, rather than detailing physical threats. 3. Yes to more contact months later under different profiles, no to a form letter.

Page: << < prev 8 9 [10] 11 12 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125