RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (Full Version)

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



Message

crumpets -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (10/30/2015 12:59:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sexyred1
My young nephew asked why the sky is blue and once we answered him, he had no further need to badger anyone.

Then he doesn't know the answer.
Notice even this famous physicist (whose testosterone, incidentally, got the better of him, unfortunately), gets it wrong in this famous video of his last lecture at MIT:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4a0FbQdH3dY&feature=youtu.be&t=2310
quote:

ORIGINAL: sexyred1
I imagine you would have told him that the blue sky he sees is much different than what his sisters see, because in your world, everything is seen through a veil of gender differences.

Actually, everything is seen as INTERPRETED by the veil of the mind!
For example, this video shows why the sky actually is NOT blue (it's more purple than blue - but we interpret it as blue!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5P6O0pDyMU

This explains more about the color interpretation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NafbGOQBlQs

With respect to the veil of interpretation, here is a great video on why your blue isnt' the same as my blue:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evQsOFQju08

The details of how we perceive and interpret color, and how that color gets transported to our eyes, makes all the world of the difference, such that even that famous physics professor got it wrong.
So, your nephew certainly does NOT yet know why the sky appears blue in his eyes, and whether his female cousin feels the same interpretation he does.

However, if he keeps asking questions, each answer will get him closer and closer to the answer.
It's only when he thinks he already has the answer, that he will be wrong every time.



crumpets -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (10/30/2015 1:20:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze
I try to avoid Walmart for all sorts of reasons,

It's a good place to get a burner phone card, as noted in this thread somewhere.... :)
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze
but I do have a fetish for giving unusual pressies to guys who do not understand the meaning of NO,

I can just imagine when your recipient receives your pressie, he utters, in appreciation "there will never be another ewe!"
[image]https://muttonbone.com/wordpress/wp-content/themes/muttonbone/img/specs-diagram-1.png[/image]
I had to look in the urban dictionary for what a "pressie" was, which, according to the UD, is a UK, Ireland and Australian term for "present".

On the meaning of no, I learned (and am still learning) that women are unintelligible when it comes to their reaction to initial sexual advances.

I have had girlfriends that initially prevented me from going further, and, it was only long after I persisted, well past the initial primary, secondary, and tertiary "no's" that I learned that they really wanted me to proceed (and told me so, afterward). That made absolutely no sense to me then, and now, although I've heard all the supposed reasons why (good girls don't, and I wouldn't respect her, and all that which actually makes absolutely no logical sense whatsoever except to women when you try to dig deeper).

Therefore, I wouldn't blame any man for assuming that no doesn't mean no at all.
"No", to her, means whatever she wants it to mean, which has nothing or something to do with the literal meaning of the word "no".

Turns out the words are not at all material except, literally, in a court of law (since so many women, in my experience, don't mean it in the least when they utter the word).

I've learned, over the years, that no is absolutely meaningless; it's merely a first-base, second-base, third-base formality, to be given a momentary respectful pause, as you would as you pass a cemetary, but then you are to ignore the word altogether, and concentrate on your CSI intuition as to the real intent of this particular lady at this particular time. Mind you, she will HIDE her intent, so, you have to guess. If you're lucky, the CSI clues will be readily apparent; but if you're not (or if she's real good), then you are forced to go further than she wants, so that you can go where you want.

It's a dance written and directed by her at all times.
Your only role in this is to always assume you must go "too far" in order to go far enough.
Makes no logical sense; but that's the drama she wrote into the script.

You have to take EVERYTHING (except her actual words) as your CSI clues. Mind you, that's everything else that is going on at the same time (like her breathing, hand position, eye flutter, or whatever CSI clues we're supposed to perceive) that we poor males are supposed to use for cues instead of her actual words.

Then, of course, theres the rub.
Just as in cigars, sometimes when a woman says "no", it actually means "no".
Go figure.

By way of stark contrast, men, in general, are simply far more direct.
They just don't ever say no! :)
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze
done it a few times and usually didn't even get a thank you but just abuse... So I highly recommend this, seems to get some guys really all hot and bothered - just not the way they want it
https://muttonbone.com/specs/

Speaking of the fact that there are very few items of clothing that are still PURELY feminine, I was heartened to see that this particular lady IS wearing fishnet garters (is that what you'd call them?)
(Women know the NAMES of clothes far better than do men, such as baby doll, camisole, halter, bodysuit, maxi, capris, clutch, ; by way of contrast, we men mostly have pants, shirts, shorts, and shoes.)

Women even have a zillion names for their neckline, almost all designed to show off the faked size of their boobs, in most cases, even though they deplore fakeness in profiles themselves.
This includes terms such as jewel necked, v necked, cardigan necked, slit necked, u necked, square necked, scoop necked Florentine necked, boat necked, Sabrina, keyhole, sweetheart, Decollette, plunging, etc.

(See the huge list here https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1957/24654/ECNO1382.pdf).

I don't think I've ever heard a man talk about the neckline of his shirt.
And, any guy with anything reminiscent of a plunging neckline wouldn't be a friend of mine in the first place, so, those guys that do, aren't in my field of daily endeavors.

BTW, one item of purely femininity clothing that our lovely ungulate seems to be missing are her dressy high heels!
How can I possibly cum in/on/around this sheep without those feminine high heels dammit!

PS: That's a joke.



LadyConstanze -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (10/30/2015 1:32:06 PM)

As somebody who has sheep (long story and I board them with a farmer), you wouldn't want them to wear high heels, in summer I tend to not wear short skirts or shorts after visiting them because I get kinda odd looks having cloven shaped bruises on my legs.

I think if women say no and mean yes, they simply don't really know what they want or it might be a role play situation, you know the consensual unconsensual thing, or rooted in their upbringing. Guys are often the same, especially in BDSM, they are looking explicitly for somebody to "force" them to do something, which I always think is a bit of a cop out and refusing to admit responsibility of your own desires.



crumpets -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (10/30/2015 1:51:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze
As somebody who has sheep (long story and I board them with a farmer), you wouldn't want them to wear high heels, in summer I tend to not wear short skirts or shorts after visiting them because I get kinda odd looks having cloven shaped bruises on my legs.

Yeah, but they'd look oh so delicate and weak teeter tottering on four sets of high heels, such that their femininity would be enhanced like Marilyn Monroe, who was definitely seen and heard with every click of those high heels walking down the street.
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze
I think if women say no and mean yes, they simply don't really know what they want or it might be a role play situation, you know the consensual unconsensual thing, or rooted in their upbringing. Guys are often the same, especially in BDSM, they are looking explicitly for somebody to "force" them to do something, which I always think is a bit of a cop out and refusing to admit responsibility of your own desires.

Personally, this "no" thing has always bothered me because I'm a shy guy, in person.
I let the ladies make the moves.
I just give them the opportunity, but I let them play out the drama.

So, I'm sure, MANY (many many) times I have lost out because I wasn't persistent enough.
Coming from a family of a lot of females (Italian and all that), I believed (until way later) that the first no was a real no.
So, I lost out. A lot. (I even had a girl get mad at me for stopping - which was an eye opener - for an 18 year old!).

I;'m also Aspergers (can't you tell), so I take things more literally than most others do.
So, I never did understand the "no" - because I was taught that no means no.
Only much later did I learn that no is essentially meaningless.
It has zero value as a directive.


I have heard many reasons why and I understand them, even though absolutely none of them seem to actually stand up to the scrutiny of logic.
They "appear" to stand the scrutiny of logic though.
For example, I have often heard they don't want you to think they're "too easy". Um. What guy wouldn't want a girl that is easy for him, but not for others? She can show that simply by not being with others, right?

I've also heard that good girls do it no sooner than the third date (which, I guess, is a variant of the too easy woman).
I've heard of mothers telling the apocryphal story of the free milk (we all know that one, right?).

I had never heard that they don't (yet) know what they want.
I guess if the no results in an actual no, then they have more time to figure out the guy (at least until the next date, right?).

I hadn't thought of guys being the same, but I get your point instantly because the "do me" sub and the experienced Domme go through that a lot I hear.
The guy "has no limits" which turn into limit1, and limit2, and limit3, and limmit3 within minutes (where is that funny "Yes Mistress" youtube video of this when you need it).

I also see what you mean when you say that the women can have plausible deniability, which fits with my wonder whenever I was at a frat party in my college days when a ton of girls would get so drunk they'd pass out. I would wonder WHY they do that, but, I think I knew quite a few guys whose girlfriends became their girlfriends only after they spent the night after she was drunk. I guess if she said no three times, and they still pair bonded, it's not her responsibility (I guess) in her mind.

I have always felt that I bond better in the morning. At night, I'm focused on something else, But, in the morning, there's that cuddling stuff. But, if you don't get past the initial set of "No's" (of which, at least three are nothing whatsoever - but more than ten would be a lot), then you go home empty forever.

One more quick point because I have to go on a hike with a friend in a minute ... but since the word "no" is absolutely and utterly meaningless, what other CSI clue would you suggest we males seek?




LadyConstanze -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (10/30/2015 1:58:20 PM)

Seriously, I don't know, if I say no, I mean it...

I wasn't talking about the no limits guy, I was talking about the guy who asks you to force him to do something, it's usually something with other guys and then he calls it "forced bi", I mean if he is asking you to force him, I always felt that he's just shifting responsibility. Don't get me wrong, no prejudice and a "It really works for me if you act like you force me, just turns me on to be forced to do it..." I could get into it, but just be freaking honest about it....



freedomdwarf1 -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (10/30/2015 2:44:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets


quote:

ORIGINAL: sexyred1
My young nephew asked why the sky is blue and once we answered him, he had no further need to badger anyone.

Then he doesn't know the answer.
Notice even this famous physicist (whose testosterone, incidentally, got the better of him, unfortunately), gets it wrong in this famous video of his last lecture at MIT:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4a0FbQdH3dY&feature=youtu.be&t=2310
quote:

ORIGINAL: sexyred1
I imagine you would have told him that the blue sky he sees is much different than what his sisters see, because in your world, everything is seen through a veil of gender differences.

Actually, everything is seen as INTERPRETED by the veil of the mind!
For example, this video shows why the sky actually is NOT blue (it's more purple than blue - but we interpret it as blue!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5P6O0pDyMU

This explains more about the color interpretation: waffle waffle waffle waffle more.... <snip>

You are seriously over-analyzing shit to the nth degree, and then some.

It is quite wrong of you to blatantly state that red's explanation was inadequate and the her young nephew therefore didn't know the answer.
Who gives a smeg whether the sky is blue or not or whether her nephew's sister sees it a different shade of blue.... all they need to know is that it appears to be blue because of the way our atmosphere refracts the sun's light and the blue end of the colour spectrum has a longer wavelength than the red end and that's why it looks like it is blue.
Unless they are studying for a full PhD in particle physics, they don't need any further explanation.


You, on the other hand, would want to know the terminal velocity at the point of impact of your body meeting a fast-moving bus.
You'd also want to know the exact impact point to determine if the resulting force and inertia is likely to break some bones or get you sent to ER.
You'll probably factor in the five-degree slope of the road, the three degree camber, and whether the bus was traveling up the gradient or down it to calculate your final impact upon the road surface.
And then of course, you'll want to know if the road was constructed of tarmac, concrete, or some other substance to determine your final range of injuries.

FUCK THAT!!!
The average 99.999% of people only need to know that getting hit by a fast-moving bus is gonna fucking hurt like blazes and might even kill you!!!!

Most people only need to know the answer to life, the universe, and everything is 42.
They also only need to understand that a Pangalacticgargleblaster is very likely going to leave you with a severe hangover - if you survive.
People don't need to know every tiny ingredient of the drink, nor do they need to know every calculation that Big Blue took over several million years to find the answer 42.
That level of detail just isn't necessary for all but a very few people.

If that is your kink, have at it; but don't belittle others because they have no need for nth degree hyper-analysis of any given scenario.

On the subject of women.....
Women are women. They are people first, kink/object-of-study second.
Get to know your woman and what makes her tick AS A PERSON, not a 'woman'.
By the time you have over-analyzed and pondered shit-loads of irrelevant crap about women and what makes them tick, your particular woman has got bored and fucked off long before you reach your conclusion.



sexyred1 -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (10/30/2015 4:36:29 PM)

Great post.

Oh, and my nephew has severe autism and yet he makes more sense than the OP.



crumpets -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (10/30/2015 6:37:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sexyred1
Great post.
Oh, and my nephew has severe autism and yet he makes more sense than the OP.


The two of you belong together.



LadyPact -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (10/30/2015 7:20:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets
quote:

ORIGINAL: Spiritedsub2
You sound like a psychotic fucking stalker.


Again, your contribution to the overall knowledge level of this thread is impressive.

What I love is...

EDIT: I made the response much nicer, and in keeping with the overall flow of the thread.

I trimmed this down because it's probably going to end up being long enough between the on topic stuff and the off topic stuff.

Dude, I want to make sure you hear this. I know you don't see it, but she's got one hell of a point. You like collecting data, right? Do some on the relation between people who stalk and just how many of them use the sock puppet gig. The percentile is ridiculously high for a tactic. That's one of the reasons why the sock puppet thing gets people's spidey senses tingling. Stalking is bad with a capital B in the kink community. Some of us know what we're talking about on the subject. I could tell you stories that would make your hair curl.

quote:

As a quick experiment, I put my profile at zip code 99999 and then ran a variety of searches for people within 25 miles.
Surprisingly, not a single search found anything, so, while the CS profile allows a zip code of 99999, the CS search engine is disallowing 99999 as a searchable place.

I kind of wonder if they pulled it as being allowable. I wasn't here for a while, so I don't know.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets
What happens if you click on that banner ad, and then click again and again (three or four times)?

<trimmed by LP>

Note: Sometimes clicking on the fake ad sometimes takes us to alt.com and sometimes takes us to friendfinder.com and sometimes to http://adultfriendfinder.com, all of which are really the same thing.

I spent eight and a half years here not clicking it at all, so three or four times probably won't happen.

Yes, they are all basically the same thing or at least owned by the same company. I find part of this odd because a lot of the people that I know bailed from Alt years ago when it was acquired. I have to wonder who in the heck is actually paying for the service. Women skate on this because it used to be if you got enough profile views, you didn't pay. (I never did.) Men on the other hand, if they want to make it worth it, they are shelling out money for the ability to send emails. Fet has that act beat by leaps and bounds. Not to mention, I'm cheap. I do prefer the word frugal.

I don't want to quote out of context, so I'll skip direct quote for this.

Honestly, I've seen a lot of males on the forums over the years that just don't understand the female email experience until they see it for themselves. Some people don't understand why this doesn't connect. From what I've seen on the forums, it doesn't just happen here. From what I know, this is big on OKCupid, too. By the way, they do research on this. I wish I could link you the threads but I don't think I could find the right keywords with the author. The only thing I remember from one of them is that unusual words in an email tend to increase results. One of the best unusual words happens to be zombie. No kidding.

I don't mind trying to help males understand the email thing. At the same time, I think I'm one of the worst people to ask because, unlike a very high percent of folks who are only on the profile side, I don't use this joint as a dating site. That means my attitude doesn't match up with what's out there. Several folks on this thread are already in relationships or have a primary relationship partner. We try to help because of what we've seen but we're not the folks hoping other people will write.





ReMakeYou -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (10/30/2015 8:45:04 PM)

The OKC stuff happened on a blog they used to run. Outside of a couple of posts last year (Rudder was publishing a book, the blog posts helped him up visibility), it's all from '09-'11, so take specifics with a grain of salt.

Linky to the specific one LP mentioned, if you're curious.



sexyred2 -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (10/31/2015 6:13:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets


quote:

ORIGINAL: sexyred1
Great post.
Oh, and my nephew has severe autism and yet he makes more sense than the OP.


The two of you belong together.


Yes, he has a wonderful, loving supportive family and network of friends.

His social skills are superior as is his intelligence level. He has some speech difficulties, but always makes sense.

You could learn a lot from him.



crumpets -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (10/31/2015 9:22:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact
I know you don't see it, but she's got one hell of a point. You like collecting data, right?
... Some of us know what we're talking about on the subject. I could tell you stories that would make your hair curl.

Many women are worried about stalkers.
Men, in general, aren't.

So, nothing I say or do will change that (because it existed before me, and it will remain an emotional topic for you long afterward).

Let me tell you a bit about stalking though. I once reported a crime that involved fellow Italians. As a result, I had criminals come in my house afterward, and I had to deal with it. Stalking is a very emotional topic, I agree.

But, let's be realistic. There's basic common sense, and then there's creepy stalking ... and then there's really STALKING!

However, running the few seconds of obligatory public searches on anyone is NOT even close to stalking. Heck, it's just due diligence. Common sense. It's like looking at the sum total of a profile to see if it's fake.

You do it every day, by the way. You just don't call what you do stalking. It's just common sense. You just do it differently simply because you don't know how to use the public searches. That's the only difference.

If you did use the freely available tools, you'd learn a lot about someone (most of the time what you'd learn is that they're married, or fake, or using the wrong picture, or a guy when they say they're not, etc.).

Do you know that 3/4 or so of the photos people send me in response to my Craigslist ads are photos that are just taken off the Internet? Do you realize that probably 1/4 of the "women" who respond when it gets to email addresses turn out to be linked to guys' profiles.

I could go on, but the point is that ten seconds of obligatory searching is simply common sense.
  • If that ten-second search turns up songs that someone likes, then it's common sense to put those songs on your iPod.
  • If you find out, from her profile, that she likes the color black, then it's common sense to wear black on your first date.
  • If she says she hates French food, then it's common sense to not take her to a French restaurant.
  • If she likes ballroom dancing, then it's common sense to look up ballroom dancing events in the area she lives in.

    She's the one who put all the information on the Internet.

    Of course, the search could turn up public records of arrests and the like, but, that hasn't happened to me yet, so, we'll ignore that for now.

    The illogical thing is that you women want us to read your profiles and journals and to get to know you, before contacting you; but you then call ten seconds of common sense "stalking".

    You make no (logical) sense whatsoever. It's all emotion. No logic.
    It's not stalking in the least. It's simply due diligence.



    • crumpets -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (10/31/2015 9:29:09 PM)

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: sexyred2
    You could learn a lot from him.

    I didn't mean him.
    I meant you and the person whom you were responding to.
    You're both two peas on the same pod.



    crumpets -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (10/31/2015 9:48:30 PM)

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: LadyPact
    I kind of wonder if they pulled it as being allowable.

    I thank you for pointing out this 99999 as every oddity of any computer system is something to take advantage of, just as we use a drill or a screwdriver or a hammer to take advantage of their specific powers.

    Every quirk of the system becomes a tool; so I will keep in mind that a 99999 profile is unsearchable by distance.
    (I need to test that separately though, to confirm).

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: LadyPact
    I spent eight and a half years here not clicking it at all, so three or four times probably won't happen.

    I know what you mean.

    The ads were so obviously fake to me, on sheer sight, that I never clicked on them either.
    But, they must be working on somebody!

    When I used to use my own browser on my own computer, since I have a hosts file that is tens of thousands of lines long, I would never see ANY banner ads in any web page (not the NY Times, Wall Street Journal, not in Google Mail, or anywhere).

    All I'd see is a line saying the domain isn't found, which, for those banner ads, is what I remember to have gone to alt.com.
    It turns out that the banner ad, upon recent inspection, goes to more than just "alt.com", but, AFF is essentially the same thing for our purposes.
    quote:

    ORIGINAL: LadyPact
    I have to wonder who in the heck is actually paying for the service.

    That answer is always the same.
    It's the same answer as who was paying in the Ashley Madison case.
    It's the same even for whose paying a Findomme.
    It's always men.

    Horny men.
    Which is the same thing as saying men.
    But that's the topic of a different thread.
    quote:

    ORIGINAL: LadyPact
    Men on the other hand, if they want to make it worth it, they are shelling out money for the ability to send emails. Fet has that act beat by leaps and bounds. Not to mention, I'm cheap. I do prefer the word frugal.

    I guess I'm cheap too. I couldn't imagine shelling out money to pay for the ability to email someone who is probably fake anyway.
    quote:

    ORIGINAL: LadyPact
    Honestly, I've seen a lot of males on the forums over the years that just don't understand the female email experience until they see it for themselves.

    I know. I know.
    There is a thread where someone posted actual mails (names redacted) of men to women.
    I have the SAME disgusting mails sent to my female profiles.

    These idiotic senders act as if I'm already their slave, in the first mail, and they're telling me how they want to fuck me and ordering me to send them pictures with specifications laid out down to the position and graphic location of the entry points. Heh heh ... I think I'll send them that sheep picture, as a "pressie", next time I get that type of suck-it-bitch email from them.

    Of course, they send those wonderfully attractive pics of their junk, which, as we all know, is supposed to get us hot and bothered.
    (What are they thinking?)

    Strangely, I have had the same type of pictures sent to me by females, some of whom I have met, so, they turned out to be real females. So, I find it odd that women almost universally complain about men sending them pictures of their junk, when, oh, about 5% of the women actually DO send me pictures of their junk (but usually not in the first email).

    If they send their junk in the first email, I usually don't even waste the 10 seconds to look up to see if they're real.

    Of course, women always doing differently themselves exactly what they complain about men doing, I almost always get a "provocative" picture sent to me by interested women (this includes responses to my Craigslist ads). I'd say about 90% of the women I converse with (probably a tenth of which I might end up meeting) send those provocative pictures in the early communications.

    EDIT: I've even had one lady ask to see pictures of "my" junk before I met her (and, since I had later met her, I knew she was real).
    There is always an outlier in all data.



    crumpets -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (10/31/2015 10:16:51 PM)


    quote:

    ORIGINAL: LadyPact
    unusual words in an email tend to increase results. One of the best unusual words happens to be zombie. No kidding.

    I appreciate the information, as any quirk is always useful, as a tool, in the future.
    But, I don't think I understood.
    If I use the word "zombie" in a personal ad, what would I expect differently about the results?
    quote:

    ORIGINAL: LadyPact
    I don't mind trying to help males understand the email thing. At the same time, I think I'm one of the worst people to ask because, unlike a very high percent of folks who are only on the profile side, I don't use this joint as a dating site.

    I do appreciate your help.
    I come down hard on some things (e.g., called me a "dude"), but, those are purely emotional reactions.
    I need to learn to respond to those who have something to say, and to simply ignore those who don't.
    You have something to say.
    quote:

    ORIGINAL: LadyPact
    We try to help because of what we've seen but we're not the folks hoping other people will write.

    I have to try to be nicer to the people who try to help.
    I realize I put down those whom I think are complete morons, and, well, I should just skip their posts unread instead of responding to them.
    But, that might turn off those who actually have the capacity to think, in which case, I'd lose valuable ideas and advice.
    I do appreciate your help and advice.
    I'll try to be nicer to the others, moving forward...



    freedomdwarf1 -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (10/31/2015 10:32:40 PM)


    quote:

    ORIGINAL: crumpets

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: LadyPact
    Dude, I want to make sure you hear this.

    Dudette.

    (Having come from the east coast, I never heard the term "dude" before I moved to California, so, I'm not sure how it's actually used because nobody I know would ever think of using the term except high school kids trying to sound hip talking to each other - but NEVER to adults - so I'm not sure if I'm using "dudette" correctly in response to you - but I hope it sounds to you as "hip" as you calling me "dude" sounds to me).

    What rock have you been living under??
    "Dude" has been popular since the rock'n'roll era and long before then.

    quote:

    Wiki
    Dude is an American English slang term for an individual. It typically applies to males, although the word can encompass any gender.

    Dude is an old term, recognized by multiple generations although potentially with slightly different meanings. From the 1870s to the 1960s, dude primarily meant a person who dressed in an extremely fashion-forward manner (a dandy) or a citified person who was visiting a rural location but stuck out (a city slicker). In the 1960s, dude evolved to mean any male person, a meaning that slipped into mainstream American slang in the 1970s. Current slang retains at least some use of all three of these common meanings.

    Mental Floss
    For some time now, we have known the basic outline of the story of “dude.” The word was first used in the late 1800s as a term of mockery for young men who were overly concerned with keeping up with the latest fashions. It later came to stand for clueless city folk (who go to dude ranches) before it morphed into our all-purpose laid-back label for a guy. What we didn’t know was why the word dude was chosen in the first place.



    quote:

    ORIGINAL: crumpets
    quote:

    ORIGINAL: LadyPact
    I know you don't see it, but she's got one hell of a point. You like collecting data, right?
    ... Some of us know what we're talking about on the subject. I could tell you stories that would make your hair curl.

    I have trouble responding to this suggestion, as you had astutely inferred, because the entire reason you're reacting this way is because of your supreme emotional attachment to the subject of stalking, not mine.
    <snip>

    ...However, running the few seconds of obligatory public searches on anyone is NOT even close to stalking. Heck, it's just due diligence. Common sense. It's like looking at the sum total of a profile to see if it's fake.

    You do it every day, by the way. You just don't call what you do stalking. It's just common sense. You just do it differently simply because you don't know how to use the public searches. That's the only difference.

    If you did use the freely available tools, you'd learn a lot about someone (most of the time what you'd learn is that they're married, or fake, or using the wrong picture, or a guy when they say they're not, etc.).

    Do you know that 3/4 or so of the photos people send me in response to my Craigslist ads are photos that are just taken off the Internet? Do you realize that probably 1/4 of the "women" who respond when it gets to email addresses turn out to be linked to guys' profiles.

    I could go on, but the point is that ten seconds of obligatory searching is simply common sense.

    It's only 'obligatory' if you have an OCD or obsession with that person.
    Most people who are not what they claim to be on the surface usually give themselves away by many other means.
    And most people don't want or need to know 'a lot about a person' until such times as a possible future may be advantageous. To go searching to any extent right off the bat is stalking.

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: crumpets
    If that ten-second search turns up songs that someone likes, then it's common sense to put those songs on your iPod.
    If you find out, from her profile, that she likes the color black, then it's common sense to wear black on your first date.
    If she says she hates French food, then it's common sense to not take her to a French restaurant.
    If she likes ballroom dancing, then it's common sense to look up ballroom dancing events in the area she lives in.
    Shheeesh.

    Ummmm.... Nope. I make sure I don't do exactly that so I can judge how she reacts to something different and out of her comfort zone.

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: crumpets
    You women want us to read your profiles and journals and to get to know you, before contacting you; but you then call ten seconds of common sense "stalking".

    You make no (logical) sense whatsoever. It's all emotion. No logic.
    It's not stalking in the least. It's simply due diligence.

    Actually, making any sort of extensive search on a particular person beyond reasonable cursory glance is actually 'stalking'. If that can be shown in a court of law, you'd better have some good lawyers to keep you out of jail.




    dreamlady -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (10/31/2015 10:35:07 PM)

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: crumpets

    If I use the word "zombie" in a personal ad, what would I expect differently about the results?

    [sm=2cents.gif] My two cents is to say that you and I may have missed the boat on this one, unless you are into gaming.

    It has to do with zombie-themed video games. Or perhaps those (of any age) who get into "The Walking Dead" types of shows, etc.

    If some dude starts talking zombies or zombie apocalypse in his messages, it would be a huge FAIL, as far as I'm concerned.

    But please, by all means, start including zombie references in your panoply of experimental profiles, now that you have picked up on another trail scent to start sniffing down like a (zombie) bloodhound.[sm=halloweensmiley_41.gif]

    DreamLady

    Edit - Inserted emoti

    2nd Edit - crumpets, stalking aside, it's disconcerting for you to make an insect study out of a woman and then to pretend to enjoy listening to the same music she does, ad nauseum.
    If I detect a smidgeon of superficial b.s., disingenuous ass-kissing going on, it's curtains. Along the same lines as those groveling "subs" whose favorite mantra is: It isn't what I want to do, it's all about whatever a Superior Goddess wants me to do.



    LadyPact -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (11/1/2015 5:48:05 AM)

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: crumpets
    Many women are worried about stalkers.
    Men, in general, aren't.

    Some of that has to do with the difference in commonality between the genders, the infrequency of escalation rates, (meaning the stalking leads to a more serious crime against the target) and a number of other factors. Female stalkers can be just as bad as males in areas like harassment and property damage.

    quote:

    So, nothing I say or do will change that (because it existed before me, and it will remain an emotional topic for you long afterward).

    Let me tell you a bit about stalking though. I once reported a crime that involved fellow Italians. As a result, I had criminals come in my house afterward, and I had to deal with it. Stalking is a very emotional topic, I agree.

    But, let's be realistic. There's basic common sense, and then there's creepy stalking ... and then there's really STALKING!

    I would put mine in the last category. I base that on being followed in public, my off-spring contact on Facebook, my husband's boss being contacted, my husband's ex-wife, messages sent to people who were visiting my home being bothered with pleas to give me messages from the individual, the necessity of having excess transmission fluid drained from my car, items sent to my home, gift cards left for me at my nail salon, and quite a bit more that's too detailed to mention. Sound like real stalking to you?

    quote:

    However, running the few seconds of obligatory public searches on anyone is NOT even close to stalking. Heck, it's just due diligence. Common sense. It's like looking at the sum total of a profile to see if it's fake.

    Try asking the person on the other side and see how they interpret it. That's your answer.

    quote:

    You do it every day, by the way. You just don't call what you do stalking. It's just common sense. You just do it differently simply because you don't know how to use the public searches. That's the only difference.

    If you did use the freely available tools, you'd learn a lot about someone (most of the time what you'd learn is that they're married, or fake, or using the wrong picture, or a guy when they say they're not, etc.).

    Or, I might not do it because I think it's creepy and if I felt I had to do it, wouldn't create a false persona for the purpose. Nobody needs twelve profiles for the purpose of screwing with other people.

    quote:

    Do you know that 3/4 or so of the photos people send me in response to my Craigslist ads are photos that are just taken off the Internet? Do you realize that probably 1/4 of the "women" who respond when it gets to email addresses turn out to be linked to guys' profiles.

    Does it seem ethical to you when it happens? Are you really going to go with 'everybody else is doing it, so it's cool to do it, too' line of thinking? Thanks. I'll prefer to be old.

    quote:

    I could go on, but the point is that ten seconds of obligatory searching is simply common sense.
  • If that ten-second search turns up songs that someone likes, then it's common sense to put those songs on your iPod.
  • If you find out, from her profile, that she likes the color black, then it's common sense to wear black on your first date.
  • If she says she hates French food, then it's common sense to not take her to a French restaurant.
  • If she likes ballroom dancing, then it's common sense to look up ballroom dancing events in the area she lives in.

    • We're not talking about reading a person's profile here. Let's not try to confuse things.

    quote:

    She's the one who put all the information on the Internet.

    Of course, the search could turn up public records of arrests and the like, but, that hasn't happened to me yet, so, we'll ignore that for now.

    The illogical thing is that you women want us to read your profiles and journals and to get to know you, before contacting you; but you then call ten seconds of common sense "stalking".

    That's a heck of a leap. Could you direct me to the post where I said reading a person's profile is stalking? Tracking people down to find their location is stalking. Let's not insult anybody's intelligence here.

    quote:

    You make no (logical) sense whatsoever. It's all emotion. No logic.
    It's not stalking in the least. It's simply due diligence.

    What exactly do you call using your former girlfriend's tracking to find out if she really was where she said she was? Yeah, you prettied it up by calling it 'verifying her location' but how did it go over when you told her you did it? If you didn't come clean about it, why didn't you?

    quote:

    I thank you for pointing out this 99999 as every oddity of any computer system is something to take advantage of, just as we use a drill or a screwdriver or a hammer to take advantage of their specific powers.

    Every quirk of the system becomes a tool; so I will keep in mind that a 99999 profile is unsearchable by distance.
    (I need to test that separately though, to confirm).

    I always thought it was kind of weird myself. It might be some kind of difference between what a person can enter and what the system tracks or not. For all I know, it defaults to Ketchikan, AK.

    quote:

    I know what you mean.

    The ads were so obviously fake to me, on sheer sight, that I never clicked on them either.

    That's the thing. Since some of the people are folks that I actually met and knew, you'd have thought I'd have been more likely to look.

    quote:

    But, they must be working on somebody!

    I'd have to think it works on fewer now than it used to but I always tend to consider the newbie element when it comes to these kinds of things.

    quote:

    That answer is always the same.
    It's the same answer as who was paying in the Ashley Madison case.
    It's the same even for whose paying a Findomme.
    It's always men.

    Horny men.
    Which is the same thing as saying men.
    But that's the topic of a different thread.

    Well, yeah. People stumble on stuff like this and think it's the path to getting laid.

    quote:

    I guess I'm cheap too. I couldn't imagine shelling out money to pay for the ability to email someone who is probably fake anyway.

    I figure I can take the same twenty bucks and go to the club. All of my play partners that I see with any frequency now were acquired exactly that way.

    quote:

    I know. I know.
    There is a thread where someone posted actual mails (names redacted) of men to women.
    I have the SAME disgusting mails sent to my female profiles.

    You should have seen it before the spam filter. It was worse.

    quote:

    These idiotic senders act as if I'm already their slave, in the first mail, and they're telling me how they want to fuck me and ordering me to send them pictures with specifications laid out down to the position and graphic location of the entry points. Heh heh ... I think I'll send them that sheep picture, as a "pressie", next time I get that type of suck-it-bitch email from them.

    Any woman could have told you that. This is not news.

    quote:

    Of course, they send those wonderfully attractive pics of their junk, which, as we all know, is supposed to get us hot and bothered.
    (What are they thinking?)

    Some men think that all people think the same. Straight males get turned on by visual stimulation. Even after all of this time and research to the contrary, they think the majority of women are the same way. I do find it amusing when naked profile pic guy doesn't understand why he's only getting contacted by gay men.

    quote:

    Strangely, I have had the same type of pictures sent to me by females, some of whom I have met, so, they turned out to be real females. So, I find it odd that women almost universally complain about men sending them pictures of their junk, when, oh, about 5% of the women actually DO send me pictures of their junk (but usually not in the first email).

    So, you don't understand that the other 95% are the majority?

    quote:

    If they send their junk in the first email, I usually don't even waste the 10 seconds to look up to see if they're real.

    Of course, women always doing differently themselves exactly what they complain about men doing, I almost always get a "provocative" picture sent to me by interested women (this includes responses to my Craigslist ads). I'd say about 90% of the women I converse with (probably a tenth of which I might end up meeting) send those provocative pictures in the early communications.

    Nah. I can promise you I don't send mail of my <cough> junk. I usually try to tell folks with the dick pics the old joke. It's not like we're going to arrange to meet and when I get to the restaurant, start pulling down everyone's pants so I can recognize someone by their dick.




    Oleo -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (11/1/2015 6:21:16 AM)

    Dude is a perfectly good word.



    LadyPact -> RE: What do senders do that they can so quickly POUNCE on juicy profiles? (11/1/2015 6:31:55 AM)

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


    quote:

    ORIGINAL: crumpets

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: LadyPact
    Dude, I want to make sure you hear this.

    Dudette.

    (Having come from the east coast, I never heard the term "dude" before I moved to California, so, I'm not sure how it's actually used because nobody I know would ever think of using the term except high school kids trying to sound hip talking to each other - but NEVER to adults - so I'm not sure if I'm using "dudette" correctly in response to you - but I hope it sounds to you as "hip" as you calling me "dude" sounds to me).

    What rock have you been living under??
    "Dude" has been popular since the rock'n'roll era and long before then.

    quote:

    Wiki
    Dude is an American English slang term for an individual. It typically applies to males, although the word can encompass any gender...

    For anybody who doesn't know, I use "Dude" as a gender neutral term. I tend to use it as a form of address anytime we're getting into straight from the hip category or cut the crap. People who know me in real life have become accustomed to perking their ears up a little more when I say it because whatever comes next is something that I think should be given particular attention. Whatever it is, there's something a little extra to it.

    I do get a kick out of folks who use 'dudebro'. There's something about that version that I find funny.






    Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>

    Valid CSS!




    Collarchat.com © 2025
    Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
    0.0625