RE: Screw the Roses....

RE: Screw the Roses.... (Full Version)

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

Message

Awareness -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 3:06:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SuzeCheri I don't know what clique it is I am supposed to be a member of, nor who I have defended. I don't recall defending anybody, No, apparently you're an expert on cliques until it's pointed out you're part of one, whereby you flutter your eyelashes and claim you have no idea what we're talking about. Go back to school little girl, at least they'll believe your bullshit. quote: what I do recall doing is telling to shut up and DO something concrete, In other words, if people won't solve problems for you, you'll just tell them to STFU. Heaven forbid you should pull your head out of your ass long enough to be part of the solution instead of part of the problem. quote: but no, you just flutter your hands and complain about how the evil women are oppressing you. I've never claimed anything of the sort. This is where your inability to think and reason logically really does give you away. quote: Well guess what Cedric the complainer, that just doesn't cut it with me. Put up or shut up, start contributing or go away, start fixing the problem or get lost. Why don't you take your own advice. NS at least tried to raise the issue only to encounter you trying to shout him down... for what reason exactly? Because he's heterosexual? Because he's a Dom? Because he's not kissing the asses of your fucking friends? Tell me, do you exactly have a coherent reason for this nonsense or are you just mindlessly posturing? Oh wait, I forgot the age thing - yes, of course you'll just be mindlessly posturing. quote: Act like the man you claim to be. Believe me, a lesbian knows jack shit about what it means to be a man.

LadyPact -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 3:07:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NocturnalStalker Because, silly girl, my main issue in the lack of quality is because the older members such as LadyPact are stuck in the prehistoric age and refuse to offer much information simply because, "they don't feel obligated/want to." The newbies like you and I can ask as much as we'd like, but what she basically said was, "Maybe if I'm having a good day and you give me the textual equivalent of foot worship." I say fuck that. I absolutely said the first highlighted above but not the second. It's just like any other topic on this site. Unless you are the person in authority over another, you don't get to decide how people spend their time. If you seek education, then seek it. Nobody else is in the position of owing it to you. It's not a situation where you demand it and everybody jumps up to do it your way. Do that stuff with your submissive because it ain't working here. Since this is a discussion about a book, we'll put it in those terms. None of the authors that have been mentioned on this thread wrote these books solely to benefit other people. It wasn't only out of the goodness of their heart. They didn't spend all of that time writing, take the thing to the publisher (in this case, their own publishing company) and say that all they wanted out of it was to educate people about BDSM. The book is still in print sixteen years later and that's with all of the information that's out there on the internet today. If it wasn't turning a profit, it wouldn't be.

zephyroftheNorth -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 3:10:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml quote: ORIGINAL: zephyroftheNorth aaaaand this thread is completely fucked. I wish a Mod would come along and clean/lock it. Sigh. Does this site have Mods anymore? Gosh. I don't think so, honestly I'm fed up. I wish people would just start another thread referencing the comment that inspired it.

crazyml -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 3:14:15 AM)
I think you make some really important, and valuable points. Of course there are cliques, and they have their disadvantages but they also have some advantages too. On the downside, cliques become echo chambers and can be really prone to groupthink. On the upside they do foster a level of trust and intimacy that can be really useful. I'm not really sure which clique/s I might be a member of, but I do recognise the fact that I'm very inclined to be snarky at times. In my defence, I do try to answer questions that I (in my flawed and subjective opinion) think are interesting in a supportive and reasonable way, but I do allow myself to be irritated by people who ask questions or say things that I (in my flawed and subjective opinion) think are fucking stupid. I completely agree that we should be much more welcoming to newcomers - and we all (me included) should adopt a "no question is stupid" presumption - at least initially (I mean, for fuck's sake... some of the questions are by any measure utterly idiotic). Yes, I agree that these boards have become pretty shitty of late, and while I think they're on a bit of a death spiral at the moment, I'd bet that at some point they'll recover. One of the things we all really have to get our heads around is that there really are many things on which we're never going to agree. Take Awareness, for example - (and Awareness I'm picking you because I know you've got the shoulders). Awareness takes some positions that I disagree with profoundly but I'd be disappointed if he didn't post - If I believe I'm right then I should welcome an articulate debate. You know, the only piece of advice I'd give anyone posting here is that you can't delete your posts once the editing window is closed. If you behave like a twat - it's there for everyone to see, unless the mods remove it. Which brings me to moderation. Anyone who gives up their own time to read the shit we write deserves a medal. I'm guessing though, that there's been a change in policy - Doubtless prompted for all of the right reasons - that has resulted in the impression (in my flawed and subjective opinion) that the moderation is either absent or deeply inconsistent. I think that approach needs to be reviewed, and the impression that I get is that the mods are more than willing to have that discussion. One thing I'd propose, for example, is a tiering of moderation for different parts of the board. We all know that Pols and Relig gets a lot of leeway (I'd just close that section personally - but I know how much some people love the banter down there) but I'd make it clearer. I'd have a newcomers section that would be heavily moderated. A general section that was moderated to the standard TOS and a moshpit that wasn't moderated at all.

SaMaitresse -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 3:14:48 AM)
Mon Dieu! You are thick. What is wrong with you? You do not want anything changed peut etre? You wish to just complain and pose and flex? The girl is on your side idiot! She has been telling you to join her in making the effort rather than just throwing a hissy fit. You are right, it will take a multi-person effort, but you have spent several pages trying to shut down and chase way somebody who is already making the effort. Her contributions aren't up to your standard? Well then encourage her to do better instead of belittling her efforts. Or better yet show her how it is done. You like to think of yourself as cunning and clever, but you are just a fool. You could have subverted one of those cliques you hate and got them on your side with one simple apology for what was a flagrant breach of etiquette and starting a thread about nearly anything. Those two would have been on your side, and their partners, and then they would have pressured their friends, and those who admire them as well. If you were half as smart as you like to think you are you would have a backing right now, one with a bit of influence and some of the long time posters who you say need to change their ways. But, no, in your arrogance you saw it as an attack when it was the opposite. So instead of making allies out of some relatively popular posters, you drive them off and you ally yourself with one of the most obnoxious poster on the site. Cela c'est un stratégie merveilleux. When you earlier said that you know little of this life, you were almost right. The truth is you know little about life, and while you set yourself a noble cause, you have sabotaged it already. You have made enemies of your first allies. You really should read Machiavelli.

SaMaitresse -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 3:17:14 AM)
quote: Believe me, a lesbian knows jack shit about what it means to be a man. I am not a lesbian, and you are not a man.

Arpig -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 3:28:36 AM)
quote: Like maybe you can also "try" to make these forums look respectable once more instead of "trying" to impress a bunch of young college lesbians, ones that are old enough to be your daughter? I impressed them as much as I'm going to a long time ago, by not being an idiot. You just don't see it do you? You really think she opposes you? You really think she is defending anything? Machiavellian mind you say? Ha! More like Bert and Ernie. She's on your side moron, or at least she was. Anybody who doesn't agree with you 100% is automatically your enemy. Here's a bit of advice...don't go into politics, you'll get eaten alive. And to think you are a product of the Ontario educational system! Thanks a lot Mike Harris, see what you brought us to.

Arpig -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 3:46:38 AM)
quote: He does have a point in the earlier part of his comment in that this forum is for discussion with people who are into BDSM. The two he addressed had previously stated they were not into BDSM/kink, but just here (at CollarChat/CollarMe) to have fun. And perhaps you may have noticed a change in their posting style of late, maybe I should direct you to Suze's post tonight in the switch forum where she mentions that she both spanks and gets spanked. Heather mentioned on another thread that she is moving towards having two Dommes and how she was a bit disappointed that Cheri didn't have any Domme in her? They weren't into BDSM but they had an interest, one which is obviously growing. So now because she is a complete newbie who is discovering and dipping her toe into BDSM as she posts she isn't allowed to participate? Isn't that exactly the sort of elitist crap that NS has spent the whole night complaining about? She isn't allowed to advocate for the change she wants to see? She is out of line for trying to get NS to do more than just complain? She isn't allowed to try get him to join her in trying to make a contribution? At least she is contributing within the scope of her very limited experience. Hells bells, those 4 have started more interesting topics than the whole bunch of us combined over the last few months. Stalker was right, the old timers are a bunch of useless elitist shits.

crazyml -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 3:49:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig Stalker was right, the old timers are a bunch of useless elitist shits. What do you propose we do?

fragilepieces -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 4:00:06 AM)
NS I for one appreciate what you are trying to say. It could have taken up a whole lot less space and a new topic should have been opened on this topic but.... Anyways in regards to the use the search function----It is suggested by the moderators of CM Often, your questions can be answered by doing a search of the archive. So using the phrase use the search function is okay BUT it also says "If you would like to start a discussion based on a thread more than 6 months old, create a new post and include a link to the old thread". I have seen people here do that, there was one girl who does not post much here anymore but seemed to be able to find and post a link on any topic. But she normally did give an up to date response. I'm suggesting this link http://www.collarchat.com/m_3300928/tm.htm Also I think this from our moderators is worth posting as well--- The primary intention of this board is to provide a forum for discussion and the exchange of ideas. Considering the natural diversity of opinion and expression, it is expected that disagreements will often occur. While debate is fine, postings of the sort generally known as "flames" is not. Participants are not expected to coddle one another, but they are expected to keep things within the realm of maturity. This isn't a place to insult the kinks, preferences, lifestyles, etc. of others. If you don't like what another person enjoys, rest assured that there are plenty of others out there that probably don't like your activities either. Furthermore, baiting, harassment and personal attacks will not be tolerated. http://www.collarchat.com/m_72/tm.htm You can read more by following this link.

DeviantlyD -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 4:02:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig quote: He does have a point in the earlier part of his comment in that this forum is for discussion with people who are into BDSM. The two he addressed had previously stated they were not into BDSM/kink, but just here (at CollarChat/CollarMe) to have fun. And perhaps you may have noticed a change in their posting style of late, maybe I should direct you to Suze's post tonight in the switch forum where she mentions that she both spanks and gets spanked. Heather mentioned on another thread that she is moving towards having two Dommes and how she was a bit disappointed that Cheri didn't have any Domme in her? They weren't into BDSM but they had an interest, one which is obviously growing. So now because she is a complete newbie who is discovering and dipping her toe into BDSM as she posts she isn't allowed to participate? Isn't that exactly the sort of elitist crap that NS has spent the whole night complaining about? She isn't allowed to advocate for the change she wants to see? She is out of line for trying to get NS to do more than just complain? She isn't allowed to try get him to join her in trying to make a contribution? At least she is contributing within the scope of her very limited experience. Hells bells, those 4 have started more interesting topics than the whole bunch of us combined over the last few months. Stalker was right, the old timers are a bunch of useless elitist shits. I don't read every post on CollarChat, why would I? And quite honestly I avoid their posts because I had found their initial posts to be trite and frivolous. After all, what does their signature line say? And I do notice that in the posts you've made regarding the four, you always defend them. Do you feel they need defending? You can make as many judgements as you like. I stated what was, at least at one time, true. Edited to add: Actually it's more than defending. You are over the top vehemently defending, as if it's a personal affront to you. I understand supporting another member in a debate/argument/dialogue/what have you, but you seem to go quite a bit beyond that. Whatever the reason, it's your reason. I just find it .... odd.

NocturnalStalker -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 4:06:41 AM)
quote: Mon Dieu! You are thick. What is wrong with you? That's good genes, baby. Sorry, was asserting some humour because I can see I'm going to be repeating myself again. quote: The girl is on your side idiot! She has been telling you to join her in making the effort rather than just throwing a hissy fit. She has, has she? That's why she has bothered contacting me to discuss ideas or concepts to push ahead, right? Oh wait, she hasn't. Much like yourself, she hides behind a tree and casts stones. Only difference is that tree is on my side of the fence. quote: You are right, it will take a multi-person effort, but you have spent several pages trying to shut down and chase way somebody who is already making the effort. Her contributions aren't up to your standard? Well then encourage her to do better instead of belittling her efforts. Or better yet show her how it is done. Do you happen to enjoy cherry-picking what you choose to argue? I have said before with praise it is good that she has made a topic rather than no topic at all or no post at all. However when she kept using it as means to keep throwing it in my face, that's when I had to bring her back down. Most of her topics were created when she first joined. So what happened the past month and a half, Madam Cici? It was, if anything, looking to be more and more a flimsy point of convenience. She joined during the time I was away, made a few topics, boom she did what she needed to do and now somebody else has to pick up that boulder and run with it? It doesn't work that way, mon cher. If she really did do her part, when I came back, I should have seen a bustling evolution or at least some indication of it. What did I see? The same old shit. If she and her partners want to pool together thoughts then I'm open to it. I'll even ignore all that, "fukkn dominant men being pussies" talk she was blabbering on about earlier. quote: You like to think of yourself as cunning and clever I think I have a point. quote: You could have subverted one of those cliques you hate and got them on your side with one simple apology for what was a flagrant breach of etiquette and starting a thread about nearly anything. Apologize for what, exactly? Sorry for not kissing your ass? Oh sorry, "derriere?" I'm not here to give ego-strokes nor to get my ego stroked. I'm here to put aside my usual egotistical/selfish attitude and attempt to help out a wasteland. I suggest they do the same. quote: When you earlier said that you know little of this life, you were almost right. The truth is you know little about life, and while you set yourself a noble cause, you have sabotaged it already. You have made enemies of your first allies. You really should read Machiavelli. And you should really read the entire topic before you go around sounding like a parrot with an accent. What I know about life is that you sometimes cannot be Superman and save the world. Sometimes, the people have to make that effort together.

Arpig -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 4:12:51 AM)
I don't give a crap what anybody does, I don't particularly want to see much changed at all. I'm more or less content with things. I'm just astounded by the idiocy some people are displaying. Be nicer to new posters? Yeah right! When I did it oooo it's just because I want to impress young lesbians. When I defended a brand new poster who was getting a new asshole ripped for her by the self same little girls club that folks are now complaining about I was subjected to a 500 word diatribe about my employment status, my supposed ED issues, and god knows what else by LadyC. And here on this thread...same thing quote: instead of "trying" to impress a bunch of young college lesbians, ones that are old enough to be your daughter? And that from the guy saying we are chasing away newbies who just spent 5 or 6 pages trying to chase a way a couple of newbies who are actually sticking around, contributing in an area of the forum that was a little moribund, and who want to make things better as well. Yet they didn't want to do it his way so he does his best to chase them away, and clueless jumps in with his normal anti-lesbian rants as well. This place is fucked beyond repair, when the "be nice to the newbies" guy is ragging on newbies and people who are being nice to them. Hell he was shitting all over than new Dom guy because he supported what Heather said. And Heather's crime? Saying she had learned things on the forum. GASP!!!! How horrid!

NocturnalStalker -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 4:14:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml I think you make some really important, and valuable points. Of course there are cliques, and they have their disadvantages but they also have some advantages too. On the downside, cliques become echo chambers and can be really prone to groupthink. On the upside they do foster a level of trust and intimacy that can be really useful. I'm not really sure which clique/s I might be a member of, but I do recognise the fact that I'm very inclined to be snarky at times. In my defence, I do try to answer questions that I (in my flawed and subjective opinion) think are interesting in a supportive and reasonable way, but I do allow myself to be irritated by people who ask questions or say things that I (in my flawed and subjective opinion) think are fucking stupid. I completely agree that we should be much more welcoming to newcomers - and we all (me included) should adopt a "no question is stupid" presumption - at least initially (I mean, for fuck's sake... some of the questions are by any measure utterly idiotic). Yes, I agree that these boards have become pretty shitty of late, and while I think they're on a bit of a death spiral at the moment, I'd bet that at some point they'll recover. One of the things we all really have to get our heads around is that there really are many things on which we're never going to agree. Take Awareness, for example - (and Awareness I'm picking you because I know you've got the shoulders). Awareness takes some positions that I disagree with profoundly but I'd be disappointed if he didn't post - If I believe I'm right then I should welcome an articulate debate. You know, the only piece of advice I'd give anyone posting here is that you can't delete your posts once the editing window is closed. If you behave like a twat - it's there for everyone to see, unless the mods remove it. Which brings me to moderation. Anyone who gives up their own time to read the shit we write deserves a medal. I'm guessing though, that there's been a change in policy - Doubtless prompted for all of the right reasons - that has resulted in the impression (in my flawed and subjective opinion) that the moderation is either absent or deeply inconsistent. I think that approach needs to be reviewed, and the impression that I get is that the mods are more than willing to have that discussion. One thing I'd propose, for example, is a tiering of moderation for different parts of the board. We all know that Pols and Relig gets a lot of leeway (I'd just close that section personally - but I know how much some people love the banter down there) but I'd make it clearer. I'd have a newcomers section that would be heavily moderated. A general section that was moderated to the standard TOS and a moshpit that wasn't moderated at all. Thank you for your input, Crazyml. I agree that to repress any sort of conflict is silly and does not allow for any diversity. As mentioned above, as long as the debate is handled with maturity I see no harm in any. I have read a lot of Awareness' posts and while I may not agree with them all I doubt he would be gravely offended if he actually got an opposing view that wasn't belittling him or heavily confrontational. The guy is ostracized for defending his view. That is fucked up.

crazyml -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 4:15:35 AM)
Hey NS, I really think you're onto something, but here's some advice... 1) Remind yourself what it is you hope to achieve (Which I presume is a change in the atmosphere of the boards) 2) Before you hit "post" re-read your response and ask yourself "Is this going to help me achieve the thing I identified in 1). If it isn't then maybe you should consider rephrasing your response or maybe even not responding at all. (Note that this is advice I wish I followed more myself)

NocturnalStalker -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 4:25:45 AM)
Good point, Crazyml. If any that agree with me would like to discuss something concerning this need for change, let me know and don't be afraid to come out of hiding just so more people can openly communicate with one another as opposed to having me as the central core.

Arpig -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 4:29:23 AM)
quote: That's why she has bothered contacting me to discuss ideas or concepts to push ahead, right? Oh wait, she hasn't. Did you? No, you just cut her down and slung belittling remarks. quote: I have said before with praise it is good that she has made a topic rather than no topic at all or no post at all. Oh really? perhaps you'd care to point that out, i seem to have missed that little bit. All I've seen you do is play idiotic little games of one upsmanship. quote: Most of her topics were created when she first joined. So what happened the past month and a half, Madam Cici? They moved, and a friend of theirs was murdered. Is that an acceptable reason? Now maybe you can tell us what happened to you in the last year and a half that you were unable to contribute anything of value? quote: She joined during the time I was away, made a few topics, boom she did what she needed to do and now somebody else has to pick up that boulder and run with it? It doesn't work that way, mon cher. If she really did do her part, when I came back, I should have seen a bustling evolution or at least some indication of it. Idiot, she wasn't demanding you pick up any boulder, just that you actually pitch in rather than stand on the side lines kibbutzing. quote: Apologize for what, exactly? Sorry for not kissing your ass? For bringing up and dissecting Heather's email to you totally out of context just to score some points on Suze for saying something that didn't fit into your particular mental image of what was wrong. quote: Sometimes, the people have to make that effort together. Then why the fuck have you spent the last 6 pages trashing the person asking you to join her in her effort? You are about as sensible as an old shoe.

SuzeCheri -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 4:48:48 AM)
quote: If any that agree with me would like to discuss something concerning this need for change, let me know and don't be afraid to come out of hiding just so more people can openly communicate with one another as opposed to having me as the central core. You're the one waving the banner, you want the credit for being brave enough to raise the issue, then do what I said a long time ago. Lead, it's your crusade, lead it. But since you won't, I will. Here's what I am going to do. I am going to keep on doing what I can in a concrete manner. I am going to post when I have something worthwhile to say, or something funny, and I am going to start threads that I think will be of interest to some people. And I'm going to urge those people I have any influence on to do the same. And urge them to do the same to those they can influence. The place doesn't need a major sea change or some concerted change in attitude, it just needs to be revived, if there are interesting things to discuss people will discuss them, and when something gets off track, then hit the report button That's what I am going to do about it, I suggest you do the same. Unless you've got a better idea Boris, either join me or get out of my way, because I am not waiting around for your committee to make a decision on what should be done. I'll leave the shoulds to you and Hanners, I'm going to do what can be done. How about you, what are you going to do?

fragilepieces -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 5:00:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NocturnalStalker Good point, Crazyml. If any that agree with me would like to discuss something concerning this need for change, let me know and don't be afraid to come out of hiding just so more people can openly communicate with one another as opposed to having me as the central core. Start a thread NS here is your opportunity.

LadyPact -> RE: Screw the Roses.... (9/9/2011 5:02:02 AM)
I apologize for messing with the continuity of the thread, but I just saw this one. quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness The problem here is that Nocturnal Stalker is up against a group of elitists who've been conditioned by their experiences to form cliques and clubs designed to keep people out. And fundamentally, their entire rationale is trying to protect that. I'm not a clique, club, or any of the above mentioned. I speak My own mind. At least half of My comments on this thread (which I do apologize to zeph for, as not all of them have tied into the book in some way) have been regarding My opinions on how I prefer to go about things. Nothing more, nothing less. quote: The position being put forward by LadyPact and others is insufferable elitism. That all worthwhile topics have already been discussed and if anybody new wishes to discuss them, then they can just fuck right off, because the INFORMATION they require can be found using the search function. The position that I am putting forward is that many of the 101 topics do not interest Me. I've made a number of replies to them over the years and unless I learn a new technique or some such thing, there really isn't anything for Me to add to what I've already said. quote: That attitude is so appallingly ignorant when it comes to human understanding that I fully question whether the individual responsible has the insight to call themselves 'dominant'. Which is fine for them. I've said on three or four threads just in the last two days that people should use this site for exactly what that want, Myself included. The folks who are here because they are seeking information through interaction are no more or less important than the ones who are here because they just want to interact with people over silly things in Polls and Snippets. Neither group is responsible for what the other group wants. quote: People inhabit a discussion forum because they seek interplay. If someone wants information, Google will find it for them. Very effectively. People inhabit forums because they seek discussion with others who are like minded. In this forum, however we find a bunch of cliquey self-appointed oligarchs who think they have the right to dictate what people discuss in these forums and how they discuss it. Repeatedly, I have said I have no opposition for that. Doesn't mean that somehow we're all required to participate in it. The days that I'm just plain not interested in spitting out the same stuff that I've already written before, it's just not going to happen. The days that I feel like it, I will. Isn't that what everybody does here? Talk about the things they want to and skip the stuff that they don't? quote: Get the fuck over yourselves. You - yes, even you - Lord Mysterio WankerTrousers and Lady AllMenWorshipMe were once newbies. You - yes, you - were probably welcomed into forums much like these or real life groups in which people were actually friendly and didn't scream "Use the search function". Tell me LadyPact - since you're so fond of promoting munch groups - how often does someone ask you a question in real life and you scream "Google it" or "Read a book!" at them? Tell me, inquiring minds want to know. I want to know if you're as rude and arrogant in real life as you present yourself on this forum. I recommend books all of the time. Yes, in person. Of course, it depends entirely on the question at hand, who's asking it, and the situation surrounding it. Which, oh My gosh, sounds ridiculously similar to what I've said about the forums! I realize the folks who don't care for books such as the one that we're discussing here or any of the beginner books for that matter don't see this, but those books are going to cover more information than can ever be done at a munch. If you were going to sit down with someone and try to cover all of that material, how long do you think it would take? You're not a fan of munches. Fair enough. For those of us who are, we go for a number of reasons. I do it to socialize, interact with current or potential play partners, get information on demos and other events in the area, occasionally it's to promote events that I'm involved with, talk with friends, etc. My primary reasons for going do benefit Me. The stuff that benefits other people is secondary. For the record, when I went to My first munch, I did have a book recommended to Me. It was "The Loving Dominant". Most likely because the folks who were at the first munch that I attended also wanted to do those things that I listed above and the munch wasn't all about Me just because I was there and new. quote: Here's a guide for all you old-timers who are so distressed when a newbie asks a question. For you people who feel your time is so fucking valuable that it's an offense for newbies to cause you to waste precious seconds reading their postings. 1) Don't. Fucking. Post. 2) Read. Something. Else. Which is what I'm doing in some cases when there's no value in it for Me. I'm on this thread because I happen to think this book is an effective learning resource, even though it's not suited for everyone. I'm on another thread that discusses traveling with toys because a) I happen to like toys and b) I have a really cool contraption that makes traveling with toys more organized when it's time to get them out of the bag. Both are BDSM related. quote: Using this simple 2-step method, you can be spared the intolerable pain of having to participate in a thread which doesn't arouse your interest. I suggest you whining maggots who make newbies feel so unwelcome consider the virtue of such an approach. Alternatively, you could just harden the fuck up. I'm actually not the one whining about it. Seems to Me the "people have to respond in fashion x, y, z" crowd or the folks who are having such an issue with recommending past threads from the search feature are a closer reflection of that.

Page: << < prev 11 12 [13] 14 15 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625