RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity



Message

akisha -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 1:09:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lashra

quote:

ORIGINAL: CrappyDom


But can you imagine the sort of moron who comes up with this sort of crap?

Someone very insecure who is seeking a doll/robot to play with, not a living human being. Someone who fantasizes alot about having a perfect woman do everything perfectly for him in his perfect world. The world is not perfect, nor are people.

~Lashra



I wonder how hard it would be for the creators of Real Doll to incorporate AI in to their dolls. The price would jump alot but for some people it might be worth it  [:D]

dang spelling nomes



akisha -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 1:10:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: machinegunBANG

CrappyDom-- i must admit that your continuous, aggressive and rude emails are becoming excessively wearing. although i respect your opinion on the guidelines that i have agreed to i feel that your harassment over the matter, both through messages here on collarme as well as this post on the boards, is absolute overkill and muchmoreso than any 'rule' in my contract.

Everyone at collarme is practicing an 'alternative' lifestyle and although we can all expect some judgements from others i find it incredibly disappointing that someone active in the 'alternative' lifestyle themselves would attack others over my own consensual choices in the subject.
The guidelines that my Master has set forth within O/our mutual contract were agreed upon as guidelines, not strictly enforced 'laws', and are to reflect my Master and my own desired end result within my training. It is both of O/our hopes that these will be natural to me as a submissive, but are written out as a reminder as to what i am trying to achieve within myself.

Just as in training in sports, one must practice in order to gain muscle or reactive memory. I am in training.
i could further go into the subject at great length and have an argument over the matter, but i lack the time and do not feel that it warrants my attention, really. you have displayed yourself in a ridiculous manner and i don't feel any more need to explain myself to you.

it is just too bad that you were unable to approach me in an intelligent and non-harassing manner about the subject so that we could have had a discussion together from which we both could have gained insight.

it is just too bad that you jump the gun in your own reactions.

Not the best sign for a 'Dom', now, is it?


Umm if it's so tiresome and annoying why not hit "block" then no more problem



sweetnurseBBW -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 1:11:04 PM)

Well I am going to have to talk to Master tonight. We only have 127 rules not 128. I am jealous. [:D]



givemyall -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 1:14:33 PM)

Im with LadyEllen on this one... the rules are on their profile because its what they have decided between themselves as right and correct.... who are any of us to try to deride them for the way that they want to live.

I dont think that I am a better human being than either of them, so I dont believe that I have a right to say that what they are doing is stupid.. 

Live and let live isnt it..... or are we all getting a little small minded in our old age?



happypervert -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 1:15:03 PM)

quote:

There is nothing gentlemanly by trying to be manipulative.

heh -- this is funny because I thought you used manipulations in the thread you started; does that mean it is ok for submissives but not gentlemen?

Anyway, in that other thread I got the impression that you kids were trying to use a cookbook approach to making a D/s relationship -- take 2 definitions (dom and sub), add in a contract, 128 cups of rules and some training, then bake in a house for a couple of weeks and VOILA! D/s cupcakes.

I don't think it is that easy. It could be a decent learning experience to start off that way as long as you have the smarts to look at this stuff with a critical eye and pick and choose what actually works for you and toss the rest in the garbage. However, given your defensive reactions so far, I'm not optimistic that's gonna happen; then you may both end up submitting to some fucked up expectations about what you should do that were invented by somebody else. A little common sense goes a lot farther than 128 rules.

Keep in mind too that this place is populated by sadists who occasionally indulge themselves by toying with others. Apparently, you've been baited by Crappy, and I think he's done a pretty good job of it. Kudos, Crappy!



Lordandmaster -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 1:21:05 PM)

Ain't nothing wrong with Rule No. 27:

quote:


I worship my Master's cock, its head and its shaft, especially when it is hard or when I am given the opportunity to make it hard for Him.



machinegunBANG -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 1:22:02 PM)

Thank you A/all for your input. As i had said earlier, i would never been unwilling or unopen to a discussion concerning any list of rules, including my own, i have come to this community for the purpose of sharing conversation and information, however i did feel that CD was taking a particularly aggressive approach toward the topic and wasn't comfortable his insistance or harassing demenor. i also specifically asked that this not be posted in the public boards despite the fact that it was on my personal profile and he purposely and underhandedly posted them, regardless of whether he included my name or otherwise, against my own wishes.

i am not opposed to the discussion concerning the validity of 'rules' or 'guidelines' within a D/s realtionship or the dynamics of how such 'rules or guidelines' come into play, however i do not feel that it was appropriate of CD to invite others to discriminate against O/our own specific set of rules.

Despite the fact that my name was not included, this was obviously a personal attack. That is where my disappointment stems from. When one presents a topic as if for discussion when really they are simply trying to smear another persons beliefs that is not a discussion but a flaming.



Najakcharmer -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 1:24:30 PM)

Ahh, it's the infamous JK.  I recall his Usenet debut where he was trying to pass off some radically unsafe, unworkable, and generally silly principles as The Rules All Slaves Must Follow Or Else They're Not REAL Slaves.  The resulting uproar of laughter, contempt and disgust was one of the more amusing episodes in ASB/SSB-B history.  The comments could be summarized as it being obvious that the author in question was undoubtedly the owner of many fine slaves whom he doubtless kept properly inflated at all times.  [8D]

If memory serves, it looks like he's removed some of the really unsafe stuff.  It used to be considerably worse and even less realistic.  A hunt through the archives of alt.sex.bondge and/or soc.subculture.bondage-bdsm for earlier versions of JK's "128 Slave Rules" should be enlightening, if you have the stomach for it. 



machinegunBANG -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 1:25:09 PM)

Thank You Happypervert for your reply. i did respect your reply in my previous thread as well and took much of it to heart.

i would also like to point out that our contract, which he had originally posted, was not the complete set of 128 rules, but were rather ones that my Master felt suited him best and were reworked in a way that he felt would be most productive and satisfying for our situation.



afeathr -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 1:27:26 PM)

Mercnbeth - love the new pic

And... the rest of you... crack my ass up!  LOL



agirl -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 1:27:46 PM)

I'm not speaking of Crappy here as I have no opinion whatsoever on what and why he posted.

Having run into the occasional utter arse-hole using *sadism* as a reason to be an bigotted, arrogant and spiteful twit, I think it's less than flattering to almost imply that Crappy has done that.

Maybe that's why, maybe not...I actually hope not.

agirl



justheather -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 1:33:18 PM)


quote:

VOILA! D/s cupcakes.



Also please keep in mind that there is no more Duncan Hines Creamy Home-style frosting for the D/s cupcakes because I have eaten it all.



LadySeraphina -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 1:39:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: justheather


quote:

VOILA! D/s cupcakes.



Also please keep in mind that there is no more Duncan Hines Creamy Home-style frosting for the D/s cupcakes because I have eaten it all.


Damn you! I wanted some of that!



juliaoceania -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 1:40:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: justheather


quote:

VOILA! D/s cupcakes.



Also please keep in mind that there is no more Duncan Hines Creamy Home-style frosting for the D/s cupcakes because I have eaten it all.


See if I share any Ben and Jerry's half baked Ms ice cream with you again!



gypsygrl -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 1:41:42 PM)

It seems there was another thread similar to this one not too long ago only there were 120 or some odd rules.  And, in that thread, I posted that I love rules.  I suck at following them, but I love them none the less. 

If I were in the right frame of mind, I can see being handed something like this thinking I had reached the promised land. 

And, yes, I know D/s doesn't have to be like this.  And, yes, I know such rules present an unrealistic view of what D/s is.  And, yes, anyone who contracted to follow such an arcane set of rules is pretty much garunteed to fail.

But, I'm a masochist and follow Sartre's definition of masochism: a love of failure.  So, it wouldn't be all bad, would it?







trannysub007 -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 1:43:38 PM)

   CD said he thinks the rules are stupid. The website was not a profile, but Master John's page of 128 Slave Rules.  The interaction between CD and machinegunBang was not known til mB's Dom/Master posted here ... unless 6 hours on the ED Unit of the hospital took away what little powers or reason and observation i may have.
  i agree that some of them are stupid, but if they help you and your Dom, more power to you both.

   david

edited because i dont use punctuation well;



raiken -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 1:44:01 PM)

Just a random thought, that i believe that maybe CD is in competition to see whose thread gets the most posts! LOL! Amazing how quick a thread takes off at times! *grin
 
 



WhipTheHip -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 1:48:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelGA2
i think the Ferengi Rules Of Aquisition would have been easier to memorized, and there's 286 of them...LOL

 
My God!  There is a bigger nerd here than me.   I had completely forgotten about the Ferengi Rules of Aquistion, and never knew their number.   Now, if only there were females who knew about the Ferengi Rules of Aquisition and knew their number.  If I ever find a sub, that is the first thing she will have to learn.  Who says I'm not a sadist?  Failure to get them all correct and in order will result in 40 lashes.
 
Cheers,
Michael
 



KatyLied -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 2:05:41 PM)

quote:

Damn you! I wanted some of that!


I'll buy some and share.....



LadyEllen -> RE: Anyone ever seen a more stupid set of rules? (10/19/2006 2:07:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: givemyall

Im with LadyEllen on this one... the rules are on their profile because its what they have decided between themselves as right and correct.... who are any of us to try to deride them for the way that they want to live.

I dont think that I am a better human being than either of them, so I dont believe that I have a right to say that what they are doing is stupid.. 

Live and let live isnt it..... or are we all getting a little small minded in our old age?


Thanks for being at least one who saw what I saw!

The more I think about this, its not so much that these rules were posted to a thread, from someone's profile. Its that ridicule was invited, and from what has been said at least, it was done with some sort of personal agenda not against the rules themselves, but against the person(s) who originated them or are following them. I find this a really distasteful idea, and I would really like CD to clarify things from his perspective, as until this incident, I had nothing but respect for him and I'd really like to be proven wrong in my suspicions of what was going on.

I have no idea who the originators / followers of these rules are, never met them or had any other contact with them, to say whether theyre good/bad/indifferent or whatever as people in my opinion. Others may have.

But to me it seems to set a really unpleasant tone to CM if it becomes acceptable to attack someone publicly without their knowledge, not because of something they said on the fora but because of some belief system or some values they hold dear. If thats whats going on here, that is.

After all, what, and more importantly who could be next if such a scenario does gain acceptance?

E




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

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
7.983398E-02