|
forcedsensuality -> RE: What Bugs You Re: Dommes & What Do You Like? (5/30/2012 8:45:46 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: subbyinlosangele
quote:
ORIGINAL: forcedsensuality
Alecta,
There were no rules in her profile about how to address her.
I stuck to her other rules, pretty much giving her all the info she wanted
(and these requirements seemed reasonable enough)
so she ignored what i had included, the stuff she said she wanted.
But this "how i wish to be addressed" was all the reply i got.
Then she ignored my reasonably-toned follow up inquiries.
I finally pointed out that i thought this was a bit unreasonable.
But she ignored (unread) seven messages before blocking me.
I've seen a friend's rejection letters from publishers. They are much more polite and helpful and somewhat encouraging, even if they are standard letter responses.
I enjoy being rude to people but only if they've been awfully rude to me first and so I'm a little bit justified .. i hadn't got to being rude with this person yet .. still trying to be reasonable..
People that change the rules all the time scare me, .. arbitrary, unpredictable, no rhyme or reason, not sexy
(oh well, just one example, but it could have been fun on Judge Judy)
Look at it this way: You sent an unsolicited email to a domme. The domme wrote back and said she didn't like the email you wrote.
I don't know why you assume that one exchange means the woman is morally or ethically required to respond to subsequent emails or to engage in a conversation you if she doesn't wish to.
You, after all, were the one who sent unsolicited email after email after email after email after email after email after email to a woman who had not in anyway encouraged these efforts. I am not surprised she blocked you -- you were pestering her.
She doesn't owe you an explanation or formal rejection letter. She didn't owe you anything, and it's hubris on your part to think she did, just as it's hubris to declare categorize your missives as "reasonably toned." There is nothing reasonable about bombarding a stranger who has shown no interest in communicating with you with seven emails. Your whole account of the exchange reeks of a sense of self-entitlement. The only surprising to me is that she didn't block you sooner.
It was not clear she didn't wish to continue. It was left open. "Don't address me like that" could just as easily be assumed to mean "do this with your next message" .. just as viable an explanation .. of course she didn't explain herself, not my fault.
Unsolicited .. huh ? she had a series of rules about how messages to her should be addressed, clear instructions to those new message writers, so NO, the initial messages were as per her profile most definitely solicited and encouraged by her.
Since her reply was a mere one sentence complaint about how not to address her not included in her profile, then my assuming that this was in fact a message from her saying "don't bother writing me" would be more of me taking liberties with her precious instructions than attempting to get it right by following up and sending a clarification attempt message i would have thought.
No this is just someone who's rules didn't actually all combine properly into a coherent system .. or she makes them up and retrospectively revises them as she goes along to suit her .. or i called her bluff so she blanked me ..either which way, a great example of airs and graces, assuming a dominant position (above normal civility) when it suits her pre-negotiation, within-negotiation, in all the wrong places !!
This is someone i can imagine queue-umping, taking the disabled carpark, using a cell phone near the hospital equipment, all because y'know, she's so damn superior, ..ha ha the normal rules don't apply
.. a rude, ignorant, self-important pig
|
|
|
|
