RE: The need to be rude?!? (Full Version)

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



Message


LadyPact -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 9:39:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icarys

Your misreading my meanings and I think are putting negative connotations on the word reject.

Once you said very politely I'm not interested in you...How many replied back with a nasty response.


The word "reject" is just one that I'm using in the "thanks, but not interested" generalization.  If I had initiated an email exchange and I had gotten any of the replies that I had sent (meaning I wasn't willing to meet or any further correspondence implied) I don't know how else it would be seen other than as rejection.  How would you classify it?  If you have a different term, please do throw it out there.

I'll check the other profile to get an accurate count.




Icarys -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 9:40:44 AM)

quote:

I'll check the other profile to get an accurate count.

Thank you.




LadyPact -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 10:03:38 AM)

Quick count, I would say nine and two more that were on the boarder of it.  




Icarys -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 10:15:07 AM)

Thank you. Nine is definitely a good bit. Is it random "luck" that Rian hasn't had the bad experience to the degree you and a few others have? Who knows.




LadyRian -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 10:25:17 AM)

I'm not sure, maybe it's what I say. I'll paraphrase, each circumstance is different.  My usual reply-

"Thank you for your interest, but I'm not looking for anyone at the moment, I'm here for the forums. I wish you all the best in your search."

And then signed, of course.
It's all true, I'm not "looking" but if I run across someone who interests me, I'll correspond a bit.Incompatibility is evident within a few messages, and then it just dies out of it's own accord.









lusciouslips19 -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 10:36:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icarys

quote:

I called his e-mails trite

Without condoning what he did..Can you see how that might have upset him?



Not enough to name call. Its not like I called him a dufas. I asked that if he wrote again to please tell me who he was. But yea, nothing like an ego bruised man..




LadyRian -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 10:42:51 AM)

Ok, now I'm waiting for a whole bunch of insult mail to come streaming in, from people who are reading this thread and think that it's about time I experienced some rudeness! NOOOOOOO! [sm=insane.gif]




WyldHrt -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 11:13:10 AM)

Sam
As LadyP and LNT have stepped up, I will do so as well. If you wish to get a taste of what it is like firsthand, I will create a new profile and forward the cmail I receive (sans names, of course) to you. I will require just one thing in return; that you reply to each cmail I send you. The replies will come to me, of course, but I think being required to reply will give you a better experience.

Let me know if you are interested.




DesFIP -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 11:16:56 AM)

I was on fetlife the other day and a woman was talking about horrible emails. She had made the mistake of replying no thanks several times to some guy who wanted her to drive several hours to top him. Her child was in a serious accident and died. This creep read it in her journal and emailed her condolences. When he didn't get a response to the condolences, within 24 hours of the funeral, he then wrote back about what a horrible bitch she was and how glad he was that she was suffering.

Does anyone really think that after this she's ever going to feel safe enough emotionally to respond to a stranger again? Because I don't.




Icarys -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 11:22:39 AM)

quote:

"Thank you for your interest, but I'm not looking for anyone at the moment, I'm here for the forums. I wish you all the best in your search."

This may be a good reason that your not getting anything bad as of yet. I think that was pretty damn polite and personal. It showed you cared a little as far as I'm concerned.

Each experience is slightly different but if there's a pattern then there is usually a reason behind it.

I asked Pact to put herself into the shoes of the majority of the people she was getting mail from...to try and look at it from a different perspective. Taking into consideration all that I've said..What do you think those people are thinking after they see her online 8 hours or so later when they sent out what they think is a nice invitation to talk..

Most people aren't aware of the amount of emails or just aren't thinking about it that females get...I was aware of it before Pact did this test..I just have never asked to what extent the numbers were actually. That's actually a little more than I imagined.

As I told her..The sheer numbers are enough to warrant a look into fixing the problem.




WyldHrt -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 11:27:10 AM)

quote:

Thank you. Nine is definitely a good bit.

Couple of things, Icarys. First, keep in mind that LP's new profile has been up for 2 days, when many of us posting here have had profiles for 2 years or more. Second, you are getting the 'lite' experience, as the new spam filter has cut down on the random drive-bys and copy/paste stuff a LOT.

*runs off to write LadyRian a rude cmail [:D]*




LadyRian -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 11:29:58 AM)

I do care. I know there are people out there who may be sort of nervous, or possibly don't have the greatest social skills. And I can tell that a lot of them might be sincere, they just don't quite know how to go about it. And I'm not interested one bit in what most of them are trying to offer.   I'm not the Mother Theresa of BDSM, but I don't like drama, and figure courtesy cuts down on that considerably.  




Icarys -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 11:30:49 AM)

That is a terrible ordeal if it's true..I only say that because it's from two sources that I don't know to trust.

For the sake of it...I'll give the benefit of the doubt and continue.
What should she do? Block the rest or close her account and give up? All of you are choosing to shut down in my book rather than accept that it's just going to happen and you have no control over it.

Maybe that's what really scares you most.




LadyRian -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 11:34:30 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: WyldHrt


*runs off to write LadyRian a rude cmail [:D]*



It's gotta be REALLY rude!




Icarys -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 11:39:26 AM)

quote:

I do care. I know there are people out there who may be sort of nervous, or possibly don't have the greatest social skills. And I can tell that a lot of them might be sincere, they just don't quite know how to go about it. And I'm not interested one bit in what most of them are trying to offer. I'm not the Mother Theresa of BDSM, but I don't like drama, and figure courtesy cuts down on that considerably.

Beautiful and if more saw it that way and dealt with it accordingly less would be sent their way as well.

On the flip side I can understand what goes through the head of a woman that gets something like that. I'm not inhuman. I have feelings as well. There's not a woman alive that can say she has an emotion that a man hasn't had...We're all exactly alike in that we fear, love, hate, get angry and etc. Sometimes the most seemingly angry people in the world are also the most sensitive and hurt.

That sounds like a hallmark movie intro but it's true.




Icarys -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 11:41:36 AM)

quote:

Couple of things, Icarys. First, keep in mind that LP's new profile has been up for 2 days, when many of us posting here have had profiles for 2 years or more. Second, you are getting the 'lite' experience, as the new spam filter has cut down on the random drive-bys and copy/paste stuff a LOT.

Yeah She and I have discussed that already. Your not going to get the full force for either side because it's not a well thought out clinical test.




Icarys -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 11:47:11 AM)

quote:

Not enough to name call. Its not like I called him a dufas. I asked that if he wrote again to please tell me who he was. But yea, nothing like an ego bruised man..

I could dissect what you've said here and probably show you how this even comes off as condescending but I won't.




LadyPact -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 11:56:10 AM)

Des, that is absolutely terrible.  I don't know the source that it came from, but I don't think there is a reason for that to be made up.

Icarys, I do agree with Wyld.  You did get off light.  I think you have to agree that you didn't put as much work into the project as I did.  Also, the "nasty" replies weren't directed at you.  Seeing the correspondence second hand is not the same as the insults being directed at you. 

In My opinion, the only difference between the sample reply that LadyRian gave and the ones that I sent was her addition of wishing people well on their search.  Within that first twenty four hours that the profile was open, I sent out sixty replies.  Regardless if the profile was turned on or not, I am not convinced that people sending email are going to believe that, just because they sent a message, they suddenly believe that they become the recipient's highest priority on the internet. 

I still don't call not responding a "fear".  Avoidance of the nastiness, yes.  If I was actually afraid, I wouldn't have volunteered to do this. 

Most men may not be aware of the actual numbers, but they are not clueless to the amount of mail that women get on a site like this.  Please pull up your mail and see how many of them even wrote a reference to how much mail I must be getting.  They have an idea, even if they don't know that it is a virtual landslide.

To get an accurate comparison, the best thing to do would be to not answer the next sixty people that initiate emails, and see whether or not I get nasty replies for not answering them.  It seems to Me that we were doing much better at avoiding that before responses were sent.




samboct -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 12:02:40 PM)

Wyld Hrt-

Thanks for the offer, but I don't think it's necessary. See below.

Lady Pact and Icarys

Thank you both for the time and effort to gather enough data so we have some reasonable ideas as to what's going on, rather than just WAGs (wild ass guesses) and unmeasured numbers of insults.

While your findings are not wholly unexpected, the number of hurtful responses after a polite rejection is much higher than I would have guessed. Scientists are taught that arguing with data is done at your own peril, so I'll defer to your findings.

Clearly, there are two separate issues that need to be resolved here-

1) Too many emails.
2) Nastygrams following polite rejections.

First- too many emails. Some additional thoughts and suggestions-

1) Allow users to limit their mailbox size. When setting up a new profile, perhaps site admins could suggest a default size of say 20 messages. Users that want more mail can request a larger mailbox.
2) So that men (and for the purposes of this discussion, I'm going to use men largely interchangeably with initial senders, because most of the time it's a reasonable assumption) don't get frustrated with spending an hour composing an email to a new contact and then finding out that the mailbox was full, a flag when you click on the box "Send mail to this user" needs to come up. Don't know if that happens these days, never gotten a response that says Mailbox full.
3) Allow only one message to a user from an individual sender or have this set by the user. Given the controls on this site which allow you to modify mail after it's been sent if the recipient hasn't read it already, there's no reason for multiple messages from a single user to a person that hasn't responded to the initial contact. While adolescents and youngsters may find it fun to send gazillions of text messages, on this site, that's getting abused. If we limit mailbox size, it's really going to become an issue.

I think this should help limit the deluge that new female users get. It may leave some people a bit frustrated, but if LP's findings are representative, basically you've got 50 emails to sort through before striking a nugget. That would suggest a longer term outlook toward finding someone reasonable. If you're an impatient domme, this may be annoying.

Second problem- and possibly more pernicious... How to deal with the nastygrams that come after a polite rejection....

1) The purpose of these nastygrams is clear- its to express anger and vengeance. It is NOT to meet someone- it's completely counterproductive. How many people after receiving a nastygram are going to say, gee, it's been six months, I wonder whatever happened to so and so?
2) If spam is not desirable on this site- neither are nastygrams. LadyPact's comment is that the spam controls are working pretty well. I suspect that nastygram controls using the same idea would work too. One of the problems may be that the Report a Message feature is set to trigger with too many users- that a more aggressive number for a trigger is probably called for. If it's set at 24 for example, perhaps setting it at a dozen- maybe fewer would be a better idea. I'm just guessing on the numbers by the way- I have no idea how many times getting reported for spam gets you booted. So we have existing controls, they may just need to be set more sensitively.
3) Setting the report a message filter to respond more quickly after an exchange has occurred. Clearly, we're not so worried about rude initial contacts anymore as much as nastygrams following a response. Setting the trigger for when action is taken after an initial response to a more sensitive value should make senders of nastygrams get flagged more quickly. It won't be possible to stop them all, but we should be able to reduce the frequency.
4) Have an additional reporting button- Previously blocked user. Clearly a lot of women are concerned that when they block someone, they just create a new profile and return. Well, if there's a way to identify these people quickly, i.e. a previously blocked user button, they'll be identified more quickly. Again, it should cut down on the numbers, but won't eliminate this practice entirely.

What I'm a little concerned about is too many settings can make the site seem daunting for the new user. I do think a good "Welcome to Collar Me" with some concrete suggestions to make the most of this site might also be helpful. Or a sticky or a button in the help section on "Making the most of CM" or something similar.

Thoughts?

Sam




lusciouslips19 -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/11/2010 12:32:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icarys

quote:

Not enough to name call. Its not like I called him a dufas. I asked that if he wrote again to please tell me who he was. But yea, nothing like an ego bruised man..

I could dissect what you've said here and probably show you how this even comes off as condescending but I won't.



Well yea. I get pretty annoyed by the the trollers for pussy. So if I sound condescending its because Ive earned it. I do expect that a so called dominant can control his temper. But even if he cant he could be a little more intelligent and condescending in his reply back.

A kinder gentler Icarys????? oh thats right....on your best behavior????

I think Ill go release myself  in da toilet![:'(]




Page: <<   < prev  16 17 [18] 19 20   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




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