RE: hazing new posters

RE: hazing new posters (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

DaddySatyr -> RE: hazing new posters (12/14/2014 3:11:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moderator3 Thank you ReinRaus, you just reminded me of something. I do hope that I don't see someone upset with a member for starting a topic they feel is tired. The fat or findom threads aside. (LOL) If members are tired of a topic, they don't have to read or respond to the topic. It really is as simple as that. Yeah! We haven't had a good fat thread for at least a week or two. Thank you for reminding me ! (As a side note: Some people suck at responding to cmail) Michael

Moderator3 -> RE: hazing new posters (12/14/2014 3:14:47 PM)
I have admitted that I suck at email. Tis no secret! I will go look though. Enjoy!

Moderator3 -> RE: hazing new posters (12/14/2014 6:16:19 PM)
FR ~ Just a heads up: Calling someone a derogatory name is still considered a personal attack and isn't allowed in any area but the Feisty Sections. Quoting or responding to a post that contains a personal attack is a post that will be removed as well. In consideration for staff, if you see a post that has a personal attack, please do not quote it or respond to it. If your post is missing, it is for one of these reasons. Thank you

ExiledTyrant -> RE: hazing new posters (12/14/2014 6:18:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moderator3 FR ~ Just a heads up: Calling someone a derogatory name is still considered a personal attack and isn't allowed in any area but the Feisty Sections. Quoting or responding to a post that contains a personal attack is a post that will be removed as well. In consideration for staff, if you see a post that has a personal attack, please do not quote it or respond to it. If your post is missing, it is for one of these reasons. Thank you Mod3, you're such a derogatory name! Jus sayin P.S. the derogatory name is most likely an endearing one, cuz that's how I roll.

Moderator3 -> RE: hazing new posters (12/14/2014 6:29:42 PM)
Why am I not surprised? [sm=runaway.gif]

FieryOpal -> RE: hazing new posters (12/14/2014 9:21:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml I happen to think the "hazing" accusations are pretty overstated. As with any public forum, people are likely to get a mixed response, but by and large I feel that people generally get the response they deserve. Quite recently, someone posted to make a slightly earnest, and pretty naive comment about young people joining the other side. He got a frank response from shifty, and then replied in an infantile and pissy way. Honestly... part of me wants to say "haze the fucker", maybe he'll learn some manners. Listen, I've started a handful of threads, and nobody coddled my ass, nor did I expect them to. Even when it's somebody else's thread, I've gotten obnoxious posters replying to my posts. So what. I'm not going to go crying to Moderation that so-and-so isn't playing nice. I'm not here to win any popularity contests either. Every so often, when other posters have pretty much covered the topic, I may not feel I have a serious contribution to make. At other times, a thread might be getting heated, so I might spam a pic just to lighten things up. I'm not above getting my nerve plucked by some insolent bastard-beeyotch who acts like s/he's on the rag or has a stick up his/her butt. As for your closing comment, Mel, I have to admit it's crossed my mind on many an occasion, but more to put that person in his/her place rather than to haze. [sm=angel.gif]

GotSteel -> RE: hazing new posters (12/15/2014 5:01:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: shiftyw I was the first poster. While perhaps a teensy bit abrasive (as I am likely to do if I find you a sexist ageist), my post was not really a "hazing". I think he got it pretty hard. I mean the guy came up with an idea that this community also came up with and just finished trying and for that multiple people insinuated that he was a sexual predator.

Moderator3 -> RE: hazing new posters (12/15/2014 5:46:54 AM)
The bottom line here is that I take responsibility for a great deal that goes on here and I am as much a part of this as the members in the thread and various situations were. I'm the one that has to make sure that things are fair, consistent and going in a direction that I have given my word to and told you all to test me on. The two situations are very different. Those that worked on a welcome wagon or mentors group were not selecting 18 year old females to greet and assist. They would have been greeting members of all ages, all over the site or on the forum. No one dropped the ball, the mentors idea was a bit more complicated than people thought and couldn't be done because of this and other circumstances. I will take a large percentage of ending that as well. If anyone is selecting young females that supposedly are clueless victims, unable to protect themselves from assumed predictors, the situation starts looking vastly different than what others were considering or trying to implement. The exaggeration of the helpless 18 year old ladies and the exaggerated risk they are in by simply being here and making poor choices are assumed or projected for the most part. No one with site authority should be placing themselves in a position that bears some responsibility for the safety and well being of another adult even if that adult is young. Are we projecting that 18 year old girls are not quite able to protect themselves and 18 year old men are? How about the forty year old woman that has been alone and wounded who may be vulnerable? Or the older men that might be taken advantage of by other adults? Are we now to teach and protect and the site organize it? Oh the many pitfalls! No thank you. Adults come here, adults either learn how to take care of themselves or they don't, it is not the responsibility of any one else to make that happen. That doesn't mean we can't be supportive, give advice or answer questions on the forum or in email when someone reaches out. I will take responsibility for those things that I can reasonably be accountable for. The well-being of 18 year old girls? I'm sorry, but that is not my job and I am not handing that job to someone and answering for how they do that. Personally I am not presuming to know the motives of anyone, but some things have this romantic Polly Anna or knight in armor beauty or enticement to them, but then we adults need to see the pitfalls there and know better or shall we have the blind leading the blind, everyone not seeing what could get them? This is all part of being an adult and we each carry that burden for our own personal life.

shiftyw -> RE: hazing new posters (12/15/2014 7:15:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: shiftyw I was the first poster. While perhaps a teensy bit abrasive (as I am likely to do if I find you a sexist ageist), my post was not really a "hazing". I think he got it pretty hard. I mean the guy came up with an idea that this community also came up with and just finished trying and for that multiple people insinuated that he was a sexual predator. I disagree. I think he is a misogynist and while you might find that innocent, I do not.

crazyml -> RE: hazing new posters (12/15/2014 9:01:25 AM)
Honestly, The chap's response to shifty blew a fuse on my jackass-o-meter.

crazyml -> RE: hazing new posters (12/15/2014 9:04:11 AM)
I don't think that there is any meaningful difference between SSC or RACK. No-one behind SSC ever intended for the "Safe" to mean absolutely safe. While I prefer RACK, I believe pretty strongly that the RACK v SSC controversy is false and silly.

crazyml -> RE: hazing new posters (12/15/2014 9:09:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml But the "Safe" in SSC isn't intended to mean 100% safe, otherwise we wouldn't do anything even faintly risky. Agreed, including having orgasms because even plain old vanilla sex can kill people: quote: ORIGINAL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_during_consensual_sex Sex is associated with a variety of benefits and also risks. Deaths during consensual sex account for approximately 0.6% of all sudden deaths. quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml It really means "safe enough" for the people concerned. Jesus.. Skydiving is - to me - absurdly unsafe, but I'm not inclined to get squirrelly about it. I don't know, I think I'd have to consider that RACK not SSC. While nothing, including sitting on a toilet is without risk, some risks are negligible, other risks you actually need to think about and I've always considered that the difference between those terms. I've just said this on another reply, but there isn't any meaningful difference between SSC and RACK - Yes, I do prefer RACK because it is clearer. But SSC has been used in connection with many many things that wouldn't pass the literal "safe" test. Not worth having a bun fight over, but I tend to go "meh" when people pull out the "RACK is better than SSC" card (not that you're doing it here). quote: An interesting note on culture differences: https://fetlife.com/groups/361/group_posts/6329825 Here's a conversation that ended up getting into cannibalism fetishes. Nobody felt the need to come in just to judge, or criticize. It's an entirely positive conversation about how they can be fulfilled and SSC through role-playing. Whereas over here we can't even have a bit of play piercing come up without being judgmental: quote: ORIGINAL: Born2BBound72 quote: Ive been sewn closed @DerangedUnit you mean actually sewn, as in a needle and thread? quote: ORIGINAL: quote: ORIGINAL: Sorry, but that is an example of a bad kink. Yes, I know I am judging. Shudders. "Shudders"..... [sm=agree.gif] Yep... this is wrong. Here's my take (copied and pasted from the last time I put it down into words...) You don't have to understand everyone's kinks, you don't have to like them, you don't have to not feel "squicky", but it is beholden on you to try not to judge others. Now... here's the thing - I make a commitment to try not to judge others. I don't promise that I won't judge others, only that I'll try. Some kinks are properly fucked up, and some are so utterly absurd that it doesn't matter how hard I try.... I can't help myself. But as a general rule - if it's lawful, risk aware, and consensual, fill your fucking boots.

Spiritedsub2 -> RE: hazing new posters (12/15/2014 9:37:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml Honestly, The chap's response to shifty blew a fuse on my jackass-o-meter. I second this.

GotSteel -> RE: hazing new posters (12/15/2014 3:48:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: shiftyw I disagree. I think he is a misogynist and while you might find that innocent, I do not. So now if I question the validity of numerous motivations you inferred from a single post that makes me ok with misogyny?

Kaliko -> RE: hazing new posters (12/15/2014 6:12:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: shiftyw quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: shiftyw I was the first poster. While perhaps a teensy bit abrasive (as I am likely to do if I find you a sexist ageist), my post was not really a "hazing". I think he got it pretty hard. I mean the guy came up with an idea that this community also came up with and just finished trying and for that multiple people insinuated that he was a sexual predator. I disagree. I think he is a misogynist and while you might find that innocent, I do not. Are you referring to the thread re: 18 year olds? If so, maybe it's off-topic, but I'm just really curious - how do you see misogyny there? ...maybe I do have the wrong thread, though...?

GotSteel -> RE: hazing new posters (12/15/2014 9:50:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml Honestly, The chap's response to shifty blew a fuse on my jackass-o-meter. It pissed me off pretty good too. Then I took a breath and said where the fuck did that come from, went back and reread shifty's post and yeah that's where it came from. She was being purposefully abrasive and his response was along the lines of: quote: ORIGINAL: shiftyw I'm a mostly nice person...but if tested, I'll dish out the snark as far as I can this side of TOS.

shiftyw -> RE: hazing new posters (12/15/2014 10:17:10 PM)
Re: 18 year olds... He singled out female 18 year old subs, as if they were helpless, in need of protection against other men, they need to learn how to not get raped, and that their sexuality is inherently dangerous. In my opinion a better opportunity for mentoring and teaching lays in teaching everyone, of every sex, orientation, and side of kneel what is dangerous. I'm incredibly far into the camp of instead of teaching ways to avoid getting raped, let's teach people to not rape. That posters set up is clearly a sign that he views women as the weaker sex, in need of his domly man wisdom. And that's just bullshit. A gay male Dom with no limits as delusioned as the straight female slave with no limits. His focus on that group, is sexist. His solution is creepy and makes him benefit from the rape culture we live in. White knights are also as delusional as someone without limits, those thoughts are in my opinion, to be challenged.

shiftyw -> RE: hazing new posters (12/15/2014 10:44:37 PM)
I also do think his behavior is a bit predatory. Which is why I posted a short frank post disagreeing with his behavior, it wasn't rude or nasty. I didn't post it to get high fives or fucking board points or whatever you think goes on here, I posted it because I was giving him my opinion of his behavior. I'm only friends with older men who respect me, not ones that get a boner thinking about how weak and helpless I am because of my age or gender. I won't budge on that, and you may feel it is an overreaction, but that is how I feel about your use of the word hazing, so I guess we are even? It, in my opinion, goes back to perception.

Kaliko -> RE: hazing new posters (12/15/2014 11:46:55 PM)
quote: He singled out female 18 year old subs, as if they were helpless, in need of protection against other men, they need to learn how to not get raped, and that their sexuality is inherently dangerous. Yes, this is a good example of perception. I keep reading the post and still - I don't get what you get from it.

shiftyw -> RE: hazing new posters (12/16/2014 4:31:33 AM)
And my first post in there shouldn't sound as nasty as I'm sure got steel is reading it, shrug

Page: << < prev 15 16 [17] 18 19 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875