RE: References

RE: References (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master

Message

Voltare -> RE: References (12/16/2006 2:25:07 PM)
John, You're quite right. If there's a way to do any sort of verification, that's fantastic. Something as simple as running a check on the IP address of an email can save a lot of time and money. The problem would seem to me, though, that if someone was active enough in their real life communities to be able to provide references, as it were, they probably wouldn't have much time or interest to devote to developing online relationships. Obviously, we all have our reasons for online interaction - the issue, though, is that the agenda isn't always going to match. Someone who asks me for references, to me, sounds like they want to meet real time, to do real time sessions or otherwise engage in a real time dynamic - and they want it right away. For a casual player, that's fine, but how many people invest large amounts of time and money into 'casual' play? (Please note, I'm talking in non-professional lifestyle activities. Pros operate under a slightly different set of expectations, and should be able to provide references without question.) Otherwise, why should anyone need to submit an affidavit? Again, I do agree there are situations where verification is appropriate, say in contacting someone (our resident celebrity John Warren, for example) for the purposes of doing a public demonstration, or if someone is offering their services as an expert in such and such. I would place that in the 'professional' category, though - simply put, I don't ask my dates to give me their work histories.

LordODiscipline -> RE: References (12/16/2006 2:25:20 PM)
*LOL.. thanks for the laugh...* *Do you imagine they looked back at the castle on the way out of Europe and became pillars of their community?* *(Sorry - it is the Catholic in me)* *Well -* *When I contacted them to poke fun, I was told by these people if I could only get to Arkasnsas - they would prove it to me...* *I might be in their area over the next year.... and, I might just get by there ;)* ~J quote: ORIGINAL: Archer OK LOD that reference needs not just a block of salt but a pillar, LOL.

Rover -> RE: References (12/16/2006 2:25:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rover People without references dismiss their value for personal, not logical reasons (ie: they don't have them, so they denigrate them). But the BDSM community has a long tradition and history of using references, because they do provide meaningful information. quote: Nice job of putting the cart before the horse! I'd argue the opposite, that people (such as yourself) who advocate the value of references see themselves as superior and sanctimonious, like you're on a higher level that all should strive to attain. Thus you dismiss us non believers as denigrating you. But ok, maybe this is more a chicken and egg argument.... References are information sources. Are you seriously advocating that less information is better than more information? I suspect your position is hypocritical, in that you use references regularly in your daily life. Everyone does. You ask friends, family and business associates about people you do not know. You either use references when applying for a job, or ask for them from potential employees. quote: 1. References from recognized groups, organizations, communities, etc. can be authenticated. As opposed to references from unknown individuals whose authenticity cannot be ascertained (in fact, the stranger writing you may even be the individual you're checking on writing to you from a different email address). quote: A references "sub-group" now, for known and unknown individuals...? Information is only as good as it's source, and any thinking individual considers the source when giving weight to that information. Information from an anonymous stranger does not have the same veracity as information coming from a known and respected source. If you would care to make a logical argument to the contrary, I am most interested in hearing it. quote: 2. These references can authenticate an individual's personal history. It separates fact from fiction, and most people find it helpful to know (early on) whether someone is lying to them or not. quote: Did you really say that - "authenticate an individual's personal history"??? Sorry mate, but some of us happen to think "personal" means NOT for publication! Or anybody else's business - need to know basis only! Sorry, mate, but we make people's personal history our business all the time. If you have prior convictions for rape (literal, not play), a reputation for nonconsensually touching people you don't own, are married but telling potential partners that you're single... it surely is the business of anyone that might be interested in knowing the real you (at the very least for their own protection). If you have a good reputation, there's nothing to worry about. But if you're worried about your reputation, then avoiding groups is probably a good strategy. quote: 3. References can authenticate whether an individual's skill set is derived from community demos, workshops, dungeons, and interaction with real people, versus the internet (often from anonymous sources), magazines, books and interaction with inanimate objects. Some people will find this information valuable in discerning whether they will be someone's partner, or guinea pig. quote: Ahh yes, a personal favourite.... You're only genuine if you've played publically. It's all about the play, not the personal intimacy. And contrary to popular belief, many of us use the Internet as a means of communication rather than the environment we live our relationships in. Who said anything about play? I surely did not. Relationships, control, consistency, etc. are also skill sets. And while you may be living your relationships real time, please tell me where you learn what you know? If you're not attending demos, munches, workshops, events, etc... just where is it that you have learned what you know? Those questions are equally valid for B/D S/M skill sets as well. Did you learn wax play from a video? Did you learn fire and needle play in an online chatroom? I'm not saying it invalidates you if you did, but don't you think potential partners have the right to be informed that your "Mastery" of fire play doesn't mean you've actually done it with a real human before? What does informed consent mean to you? quote: 4. References can authenticate an individual's reputation within the community. Most reputations are well earned, and some people will find it helpful to know how an individual has come to be thought of in that way (good or bad). quote: The most spectacular flaw of ALL references! Just exactly how many people offer references from anyone likely to say something negative? To have a good reputation within a group speaks well for anyone. There's no flaw in that. Don't hold it against someone that they are well thought of by others. That's convoluted logic to the extreme. quote: 5. References can authenticate that an individual socializes real time with other lifestylers. Some people may want/need that socialization, others may not. Denying the value of socialization denies the very existence and popularity of boards like this. quote: And what if they're not interested in socialising with other lifestylers beyond their personal relationships? That's a red flag now? If I have an interest in socializing with other lifestylers (which I do), and an interested partner does not, it is most certainly a red flag regarding our compatibility. That's undeniable. quote: 6. Since the past is a predictor (though not a guarantor) of the future, these references can indicate that an individual will continue to benefit from the resources provided by their local community. quote: And don't forget to compile a lifestyle/personal relationship CV while you're at it. Should make for great entertainment.... I have no idea what point you're trying to make here, so I won't even hazard a guess. If you'd like to make another stab at it, feel free. quote: Like you, I (and the vast majority of folks I know) are more than happy to provide references where there is a mutual interest in getting to know one another. They provide a level of credibility at that crucial stage in which someone could be creating a fictitious persona and personal resume. I know, that would be a rareity online, wouldn't it? quote: Yikes, there it is - "personal resume"!!!! Is it really so difficult to grasp that D/s or M/s is the dynamic by which many of us prefer to live our personal and private lives and relationships? That even if there were a local community or dungeon where I lived, I still wouldn't be interested strutting about with slave(s) in tow for others to judge and validate my bona fides? By all means feel sanitised and superior for living a mutually referenced lifestyle but doing anything publically leaves anyone open to "denigration", so learn to accept the consequences, too! But pardon me if I don't feel the least bit soiled, inadequate or inferior as a consequence of my personal choices. I grasp the dynamics of power exchange relationships rather well, thank you. I've even been known to present on the topic to groups, workshops, etc. And while there may be some who need to "strut about" for personal validation, neither I nor the people I know fall into that category. Though judging by how sensitive and defensive you are about this topic, you might benefit from a little personal validation yourself. As for my (or anyone else's) references, they remain a valuable source of information when making the acquaintance of others. John

Archer -> RE: References (12/16/2006 2:28:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LW3 [ reading this I don't belive that she is saying anything about references "Just when they are available". she is more like implying that if you aren't know by someone as a Dom then you aren't trustworthy. Of course, when references are available they are a good information source but lack of references doesn't make us less trustworthy. it only makes harder to determine if we are trustworthy or not. I'll pare the question down a bit to make it a bit more clear as to what I read there. "you aren't know by someone as a Dom then you aren't trustworthy." So in other words if you are a Dominant claiming any experience at all RT, Somebody out there knows you. Might be only the submissives you had relationships with in the past, might be the entire membership of 36 groups, but unless all of your Dominant experience has been masterbatory in nature someone else was involved, and knows you. Now if you only practice in private then you are at a slight disadvantage in references since you can only provide a few and many if not most of them are going to be your Ex's. Which has a definate twist on the references available since you are ex's for some reason.

Voltare -> RE: References (12/16/2006 2:33:44 PM)
Archer, See this is what I'm having trouble with. Disadvantage in what respect? If I'm offering my services as an instructor in caning for 50 bucks an hour, sure I'll need references; but sitting here as we kick the can around the back yard, so to speak, what value will references actually have? quote: Now if you only practice in private then you are at a slight disadvantage in references since you can only provide a few and many if not most of them are going to be your Ex's. Which has a definate twist on the references available since you are ex's for some reason.

Rover -> RE: References (12/16/2006 2:42:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Voltare See this is what I'm having trouble with. Disadvantage in what respect? If I'm offering my services as an instructor in caning for 50 bucks an hour, sure I'll need references; but sitting here as we kick the can around the back yard, so to speak, what value will references actually have? People are online, and at Collarme, for a variety of reasons. Often one of those reasons includes finding a compatible partner. Given that the internet is a playground for liars, cheats, fantasizers, etc. the use of references can at least substantiate the basics about an individual (as I have noted in greater detail in earlier posts), without having to devote many hours, days and/or weeks before the truth trickles out or is discovered. If you're only here for the conversation, references are of less value. Though, there may be occasions where you want to assess the veracity of information, and in doing so consider the quality of the source. In that case, a reference would also be helpful. John

Archer -> RE: References (12/16/2006 2:42:44 PM)
Lets see If you are asking someone to consider meeting you and invest the time and effort into the consideration that their mind body and soul will be at your whim then having references that can tell them Yes the guy knows what he's doing, he is in control of himself, he has been honest with them, he is in fact single, he has attended some workshops on XYZ and when in the workshops he seemed to have a reasonable grasp of the relationship dynamic, He has displayed respect for others in the group, he's spent time helping with the setup and breakdown for parties and is a general all around good guy. If you compare that guy to a guy who you are thinking of meeting who has no references to provide at all. Then between the two the guy with the references has an advantage and the guy without is at a relative disadvantage. Niether has been proven 100% nor has either been proven to not be possible for a meet. But the fact again comes down to as Rover said More Information is better than less information.

MadRabbit -> RE: References (12/16/2006 2:44:25 PM)
A good number of the replies here remind me very clearly of the reason why I left Internet discussion boads, but since I am cruising threw a few posts, I might as well throw out some opinions for the sake of rationality. People seem to have some really ignorant views of trust. I hear the question "What dont you trust your Master? How can you be his slave?" thrown around in many forms and it is sadly used as nothing more than a guilt trip to make a submissive fela bad or push them to do something they are not quite ready for. Trust isnt an object. Its not something you just have in the context of "Ok I have trust in you! Do whatever you like to me!". Trust is a bond between two people, something that is always getting stronger (or weaker) between two people. A Master and slave couple will have more trust in each other after 50 years then they did after 40 years. When two people meet for the first time, there should for the sake of safety be very little trust between them. Its something that slowly develops over time. Saying something like "What? You dont trust your Master?" when they ask for an HIV test two months into a relationship is wrong, ludacrious, and stupid. Unless you have been with me a substantial amount of time and I have proven myself to you, you should ask me for an HIV test! And if your in a relationship where sexual contact with other people is coming into play, you both should be taking one regularly. The BDSM community has taken a lot of basic concepts that happen in a vanilla relationship and formalized and structured them to the point where it almost seems like a job interview or a scheduled corporate meeting. A night of hot sex or fun becomes a "scene". When my girlfriend used to say "you cant fuck me in the ass, but I will give you a blowjob" becomes "negotation". The common sense act of not fucking her in the ass because she said not to becomes "limits". And when you introduce your girlfriend to your friends and all your friends said "hey hes a cool guy" became "having references". And oddly enough I dont remember ever having to giving a history of my "experience" with past relationships and my skills in the bedroom. Yes, BDSM is a dangerous lifestyle, but in the end its just two people trying to form a relationship and when you overly formalize it, you lose something that should be natural. When my girl was still getting to know me, I wanted her to meet my friends in the local community. Not because I had to supply "references", but because it played a helpful part in developing trust with her. If my girl had judged me based on having a certain number of "references" or a certain amount of "experience", and not by the quality of my character and the connection that developed between us, we would both be single and unhappy still. References are great for when your going to travel to a nearby community to see an event where no one has an idea who you are and your trying to get them to give you an RSVP, but in the realms of a relationship or sexual play between two people, they ultimately mean very little outside of providing some small measure of trust and comfort that this person isnt going to disembowel you at the end of the night. The same goes really for "experience". Talk is cheap. I told my girl straight up this is what I can do and what I cant, but it did very little in developing trust or making her feal more comfortable with me until after I had done what I said I could do without injuring her or going too far. On my profile, I keep a current list of my SM skills I am confident in and the SM skills I wont do because of lack of training and practice, but it means nothing. Just words on a computer screen. If someone you meet on the first night says they have "15 years of experience in bondage" and a reference from some stranger who says hes a good guy, are you going to allow him to tie you up spread eagle, completely immoblized? I should hope not. Personally I would go with the guy who doesnt flaunt his expereince and doesnt have any references, but wants to start off with mental bondage, then move up to just wrists with feet still free and the knots in easy reach of the fingers. Why? Because he is concerned with developing trust with you, starting slow, and not placing you in any bondage positions that render you completely helpless to whatever he wants to do right off the bat. You start off with your hand (no real threat of damage), move up to a paddle (Ok chance of breaking a tailbone if too hard), then finally use the cane (Real threat of serious damage if not used properly). So my advice to you...dont worry about your references and rather worry about conducting yourself in a manner that makes your submissive capable of developing trust in you like treating her limits like the Bible and not placing her in any overly vulnerable positions or engaging in any dangerous play on the first night. And the same goes for your submissive. Dont leave any brusies until you are sure she isnt going to call the cops and charge you with abuse. Its not the references that are important, but rather the part they play in the ultimate goal : developing trust. There is no replacement for common sense, responsible adult behavior, and most of all, your own intuition! And not jumping off a bridge blindfolded into your Master's arms doesnt mean you dont trust him, but rather you just have time and work to do before you have enough trust to do such an incredibly risky act.

Emperor1956 -> RE: References (12/16/2006 2:54:06 PM)
quote: Archer: It gives me pause when a person has no references. I'm using Archer's comment as a jumping off point on something that has been on my mind for a while, and fits right into this topic. It gives me pause sometimes when someone is unknown, but it gives me more pause when a known bad player gets good references. Let me elaborate. First, on references: I have never provided references directly to a potential submissive, nor do I recall being asked for them. I think this is because of how I meet people. I usually converse extensively with a potential (online, phone and in person) and in the course of those discussions, B/D/S/M experience comes up, so the "references" are given indirectly. Also, I give her my real name and a website fairly early on, so that she can verify some of the key basics about me. And I don't push for a quickie play session in person, where she is compelled to think "what do I know about him"? For example, holly knew several of the people I knew (she had some real time experience and extensive online and knowledge our local B/D/S/M scene). She never asked for a specific reference. In the past, other potential submissives have either had no clue about the local scene, so references, even impeccable ones, were of little value, or they've known me through munches or dungeon parties, and I would guess references seemed superfluous. If I were asked, I'd give them, tho I'd have to think about who. Now, what has been on my mind: What is the value of a reference? There is a well known "Dominant" in our area who is quite active both online and in the real world. He is by all reports a competent top (in that his skills are good) and knowledgeable about WIIWD, but, to put it baldly, he is a shitty human being. I do not say this because of any personal animosity (I don't think he even knows me, although he should as our paths cross all too often). The reason I say he is a shit is that he has emotionally damaged a long string of women, most novices, in his pursuit of building a poly household. I know several of these women. He has an extraordinary "burn rate". When I was seeking, I would run into this situation so often I started to think that there was some karmic reason that literally 1 out of 3 potential submissives I would meet would have met this man early on in their search for submission, become entangled in some way and for some period of time, and I was, a month or a year later, the next guy picking up the pieces! I want to stress that this is not about his play style, or how harsh he is (indeed, I've been told by those who have real life actual comparisons that I am harsher, or "hit harder" than he does.) This is about the way he deceives these women, what he "teaches" them, and how he leaves them. And yes, I know that in each case there's a willing victim. I'm not assigning blame in this post. My point is about the reference: In each instance (and I count 5 encountered over 3 years or so on reflection) the woman had a glowing reference about this guy. This person apparently has two or three women who are active and experienced in the local scene who will vouch for him. He gives these "references" out freely, and these women give this guy a glowing report to novice submissives who enquire. And maybe the "references" believe what they say, though if I look at track record, I find that difficult. Also, I don't know if these references have actually been in a real-time session with the Dominant man; several of them are Dominant themselves. It has been alleged that he pays them for good reports, or that he pays their way to local dungeon events or otherwise compensates the references. Also, he is somewhat powerful in the local scene, and I have been told that people don't like to get on his bad side (although several of the D/s venues I know have barred him from entry.) So apparently there are those who will curry favor by giving out these glowing reports. No one has died (that I know of), no one has permanent scars (that I know of) but this situation has cause a lot of misery and difficulty. And yes, I know some of these "victims" might have been victimized, traumatized or something elsewhere. I am just relating what I've seen. So, what's the value of a reference? The object lesson to those who rely on references is clear -- the reference might be worthless. If the "voucher" has so little integrity as to sell her reference, and the "vouchee" buys a good reference. Even if no money changes hands, how valuable is the statement of someone you don't know about someone else you don't know? Sometimes it gives me pause IF the person is too willing to give a reference. E.

bandit25 -> RE: References (12/16/2006 3:03:34 PM)
Emperor, I must say I think you are absolutely correct. I believe I know who you are talking about and I, too, know for a fact that he can supply what others might consider impeccable references. I also know of some emotionally damaged women who have been left in his wake. As regards "powerful" well, I guess it depends upon how you look at it, but, againk I know what you mean.

Voltare -> RE: References (12/16/2006 3:05:16 PM)
Archer & Rover, Wouldn't this beg the question "why spend so much time and effort meeting anyone online?" More specifically, why meet with the predetermined notions that XYZ must be the result of the online meeting with someone who's distance precludes doing so casually? I've met probably close to a dozen people from the net, with varying degree of success (two girls I dated for well over a year, and about half 'fudged' the truth to some degree.) There was a laundry list of women whom I didn't meet, due to inconsistancies with what they told me (give or take ten years, 150 pounds, marital status, etc etc.) I accept that many people online simply are not who they say they are, and that's why I suggest it should be taken less - not more - seriously. No amount of references - BDSM, work, personal, etc - could cover every issue. The two meetings that did turn out quite well lived within 100 miles, and we met within five days of talking. Because distance wasn't a factor, there was no need to 'establish' a relationship, before we actually met, and the actual meetings - one at a coffee shop, the other a restaurant - really were first dates. No 'I love yous' traded, no 'I want you for the rest of my life' wasted, and if nothing panned out, no plane tickets wasted or hopes, hearts, and dreams shattered. No question, meeting online is tough. I think some of the factors that contribute to people looking online - such as the ability to use specific criteria (height, weight, age, hair color, specific kink interests) would be especially attractive to people with meticulous and methodical personalities. Thus there would naturally be a great deal of disappointment when the person who claimed to meet these specific criteria turned out to have simply been fantasizing - and selling that fantasy as the real thing. Focusing on realistic goals when meeting new people - including geographic and financial considerations, to me, would make any necessity for 'references' irrelevant. Stephan

susie -> RE: References (12/16/2006 3:30:58 PM)
My Master had a live in submissive for over 8 years but never went to munches or dungeons or was a member of any group. When we met online I was a new submissive with no contacts within the lifestyle. Had I asked him for references at the time he would not have been able to give any. I spent time talking to him and getting to know him before meeting. There were many others I chatted to at the time but only 2 or 3 made it to the meeting for coffee stage. He of course was one and I have never looked back. Had I read some of the posts here at the time I was thinking of meeting him I would have been of the view that everyone that is a "true Dom or Master" would be able to name someone in the lifestyle that knows them and to steer clear of anyone that could not provide this kind of information. What rubbish. Some of us prefer to keep our relationships private. That does not make us any less "true"

Rover -> RE: References (12/16/2006 4:09:56 PM)
quote: This person apparently has two or three women who are active and experienced in the local scene who will vouch for him. He gives these "references" out freely, and these women give this guy a glowing report to novice submissives who enquire. Demonstrates the value of a reference from recognized groups, rather than anonymous strangers. You proved that point rather eloquently. The local group would likely have replied much like you did: quote: He is by all reports a competent top (in that his skills are good) and knowledgeable about WIIWD, but, to put it baldly, he is a shitty human being. I do not say this because of any personal animosity (I don't think he even knows me, although he should as our paths cross all too often). The reason I say he is a shit is that he has emotionally damaged a long string of women, most novices, in his pursuit of building a poly household. And armed with that information, a prospective partner is free to come to their own informed conclusion. If you're looking for references to be magical, infallible guarantors, you'll be sadly disappointed. If you're looking for anything to be a magical, infallible guarantor, you'll be disappointed as well. John

Rover -> RE: References (12/16/2006 4:13:07 PM)
Stephan, it sounds as if references aren't for you. More power to you. Some of us find great value in them. More power to us. John P.S. - We do not all have the same geographical and financial limitations. It would be misguided to assume, as you have, that we do.

Focus50 -> RE: References (12/16/2006 4:20:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Archer quote: ORIGINAL: 2. These references can authenticate an individual's personal history. It separates fact from fiction, and most people find it helpful to know (early on) whether someone is lying to them or not. Did you really say that - "authenticate an individual's personal history"??? Sorry mate, but some of us happen to think "personal" means NOT for publication! Or anybody else's business - need to know basis only! If this person is about to meet you alone for the first time for play or something then they have a NEED TO KNOW some things that are personal since the proposed activities are personal. *Lol, there it is yet again - all about play! You also can't grasp that D/s can be about personal** and intimate, loving relationships? That some of us get grossed out at the prospect of playing with a stranger - a virtual piece of meat? Sorry, but that's what dogs do.... Fine for some occasional kink or role play but not as a philosophy and culture you're advocating. Certainly not for me, anyway.... But I agree, if this is normal behaviour for you, I'd hope along with references you've had all your shots, too!* quote: 5. References can authenticate that an individual socializes real time with other lifestylers. Some people may want/need that socialization, others may not. Denying the value of socialization denies the very existence and popularity of boards like this. And what if they're not interested in socialising with other lifestylers beyond their personal relationships? That's a red flag now? Actually yes it is a red flag, that is not to say it disqualifies them only that it says "Look here there might be a problem you want to ask about this more and gather more information on this area. I always wonder what people are thinking when they read "red flag" beyond the idea that it signals a possible problem and requires that you look into it. What might be a problem? A personal/private D/s based relationship as opposed to what seems a "hive" mentality where all your fellow BDSM paranoids reference/validate (or not) each other? Wonderful advertisement for BDSM "communities" - no wonder I avoid them.... quote: 6. Since the past is a predictor (though not a guarantor) of the future, these references can indicate that an individual will continue to benefit from the resources provided by their local community. And don't forget to compile a lifestyle/personal relationship CV while you're at it. Should make for great entertainment.... OK how many times has it been said here already that nobody is saying YOU or anyone else has to do it. Only that it CAN serve a purpose. Wrong again! The inference has been that if I don't do it (references), I have something to hide - that I'm untrustworthy! pffft Focus.

KatyLied -> RE: References (12/16/2006 4:39:51 PM)
I've only been to two munches in my life. I have been to get togethers (bbq's, brunches) with other lifestylers. I found this to be beneficial on a personal level. I was getting ready for a coffee meet with a Dom I'd been talking to for three weeks. I was telling some lifestyle friends about it. It turns out they knew him and his sub (um, he failed to mention that little detail about having a sub). I was grateful to learn this information.

Rover -> RE: References (12/16/2006 4:53:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Focus50 The inference has been that if I don't do it (references), I have something to hide - that I'm untrustworthy! pffft Focus. The inference that you clearly make is that you're insecure about this issue. Really, you're beyond having an intellectual discussion about the issue and are simply having a public hissy fit. John P.S. - Lots of very fine folks are interested in and participate in B/D S/M, without an interest in power exchange relationships. Why do you continually besmirch them? It is a personal challenge to be diplomatic with you, when you demonstrate such contempt for others and their kinks. No wonder you are not part of any local community... frankly, bigots like you generally aren't welcome.

Rover -> RE: References (12/16/2006 4:58:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LW3 quote: ORIGINAL: Rover No one is suggesting any sort of "certification". Just that when they are available, references are a good source of information. I think we have forgoten the first post. let me quote it: quote: ORIGINAL: Unicorm2 Is it wrong of me to expect, tjis information from a true Dom or Master. If you aren't a member of a dungeon, or known by someone somewhere as a Dom, then why should I trust you? reading this I don't belive that she is saying anything about references "Just when they are available". she is more like implying that if you aren't know by someone as a Dom then you aren't trustworthy. Of course, when references are available they are a good information source but lack of references doesn't make us less trustworthy. it only makes harder to determine if we are trustworthy or not. And if that is the criteria she chooses for herself, who are you or any of us to say that it is wrong? We all make our own decisions in life, and have our own requirements for a partner. I see nowhere that she says this is what you (or anyone else) should do. So why does it put a bee in your bonnet when she shares what works for her? John

untamedshysub -> RE: References (12/16/2006 5:01:13 PM)
well just because they have references does not mean much. I have seen people create whole companies and provide proof of income that never existed because they knew how to play the game. Know somoeone who purchased two BMW with fake references so no its not the reference that makes the Dom and even if they know the person that does not make me less crazy behind closed doors.

Unicorm2 -> RE: References (12/16/2006 5:01:46 PM)
I have read through the various replies and should point out that I am frequently dealing with Dom's who do not live in the area and are expecting to meet and then play. This means one of three things, I will be taking them to a public dungeon where I have to vouch for them. (Already had a very sticky situation in which a preditor used my name as a reference to gain admitance to a dungeon and then had to be forced to leave. I had decided upon meeting for coffee that I did not want him, did not think he would do that; but he did. And then waited outside the dungeon for me to come out until some of our males went over to talk with him,) Friends play spaces, which also puts them in danger, or playing with them in a hotel room, more danger than I want to deal with. For those who have given me references, most have checked out fine, I took them to the dungron and a good time was had by all. Most internt meetings do not give you time for a long getting to know each other. They are ready and looking for play partners

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625