|
Noah -> RE: Oh dem links....dem well meaning helpful links! (9/7/2006 4:15:28 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: LotusSong
The reason *I* don't check the archieves is because I like to see a fresh discussion with the current CM members where we can activly exchange or ideas and opinons.
(and yes, I did check before posting this thread)
One of the great things about the CM archivists is that they store the old threads in ziplock bags, refrigerated. They just don't go stale.
Maybe this is one of those Mars/Venus things whereby a woman would rather have, well, let's just say whatever information she can get from a process of interaction and cooperation and all that crap, while a guy tends to just want the information. I mean it seems weird to say "That information was shared last week. I don't want it. I want fresh information" unless the topic is pretty ... topical.
Accordingly then, maybe bisexuals like to get their information both ways? We clearly need another one of those government funded BDSM research grants so we can get some fresh data on this--or do a thorough job of combing through the old data, anyway.
(Of course you said fresh discussion not fresh information, but isn't it the same difference in the end?)
There are usually more reliable sources of hard information than whomever happens to be posting here on a given evening, obviously. Nothing wrong with going to those sources when it is information you want and coming her primarily for interaction.
Someone posted a while back about how it can get tiresome to see the same old comments from the same old people month after month. I'd give you the link but I can't be arsed to dig it up, you know? I think it might be even more tiresome to keep posting the same old (stale?) information to thread after thread on a given topic.
I was gratified to get a letter today from someone who was combing old threads on the subject of humiliation and who was pleased enough with what she found in an old post to write me a letter about it. There are threads on that topic every month, maybe every week. It just feels stale to me, the notion of posting that same information ad nauseum.
But I will refer her to you if you want to have a lively discussion about how humiliation used to work way back in March, or something.
So do your research as you please, especially if the process of interaction means relatively more to you and maybe the content relatively less.
I wonder, LotusSong, if the following might be a part of your desire to deal here in more or less real time discussion rather than archival stuff. What is found here is to a great extent opinion. Could it be that, when dealing in opinions you'd rather have access to opinions of people you have had the chance to watch in action, so to speak? People you may have interacted with already yourself, even? I can see how this might help provide at least a degree of subjective validation (or invalidation in that event) for the opinions you'll encounter today.
I wonder also, LotusSong; when you go to the library do you ever make it past the Current Periodicals section? Or maybe you just chat with the nice folks at the desk? I mean that's okay. More books for me.
|
|
|
|
