RE: The need to be rude?!?

RE: The need to be rude?!? (Full Version)

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

Message

subjeff8484 -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 1:49:52 PM)
Hi, Miss O. This is an interesting post, and I've often heard Dommes on here complain about this problem. I think sometimes folks don't realize that it takes time to connect with a good Domme, and they want instant gratification/satisfaction, so they rush and don't get to know people. I don't think all male subs are like that, though, but seems a lot are.

PeonForHer -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 2:02:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyNTrainer I'm kind of a stickler for ethics, so it would have to be made clear somewhere in the profile that they had no expectation of confidentiality when writing. I'll have to think about how to phrase that to be ethical but not skew the results. Right - well, if you can come up with something, then I'm game. quote: Go to Fetlife and check into the regular BDI thread on the Sisterhood, though you can't join or post there. The latest incarnation of the BDI (Bad, Dreadful, Incomprehensible) is here. They were mostly stupid, rather than nasty - presented for a bit of amusement mainly, I felt. No harm in that, mind you. quote: Hmm. What other perks do I get if I have you as my secretary? [sm=evil.gif] Well, I'd be glad to send you a pic of my todger for half the usual rate - only £499.99. There. Can't say fairer than that, can I? :-)

LadyNTrainer -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 2:50:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer Right - well, if you can come up with something, then I'm game. Saying you're "game" around a hunter can end poorly. [;)] Seriously, the guys who send ugly email don't read profiles. I could say just about anything and it would result in invites to have sex, as long as the profile was female and had a photo attached. I have come up with something I think will work though. quote: Well, I'd be glad to send you a pic of my todger for half the usual rate - only £499.99. There. Can't say fairer than that, can I? :-) Certainly. Being as I am the widow of the late Solicitor General of the Bank of Nigeria, he has left in trust for me the sum of eighteen (18) million pounds, which I can release into your trustworthy keeping upon receipt of your bank account number, your personal information, and a picture of your todger. While you get ready to send me all of these things, I'm going to lay some ground rules down for the experiment. 1. No reposting the name or text on my social profile. We're not revealing who it is here. You will certify only that it is primarily friendly and social, and an honest description of a lifestyle dominant who has various nonsexual personal interests and hobbies that she wants to chat about. 2. I have ethical issues with outing people, so if you post people's emails, identifying details must be removed first. We good to go? If so, my profile and nonsexual (hobby related) photo is ready for upload.

PeonForHer -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 3:30:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyNTrainer Seriously, the guys who send ugly email don't read profiles. I could say just about anything and it would result in invites to have sex, as long as the profile was female and had a photo attached. I have come up with something I think will work though. Yes . . . I figured you would. I also had an idea that the nasty-senders don't read profiles. Excellent! quote: Being as I am the widow of the late Solicitor General of the Bank of Nigeria, he has left in trust for me the sum of eighteen (18) million pounds, which I can release into your trustworthy keeping upon receipt of your bank account number, your personal information, and a picture of your todger. Why are you going around claiming a) that I'm dead and b) that you're one of my widows? Hell, you can't trust anyone these days. quote: 1. No reposting the name or text on my social profile. We're not revealing who it is here. You will certify only that it is primarily friendly and social, and an honest description of a lifestyle dominant who has various nonsexual personal interests and hobbies that she wants to chat about. 2. I have ethical issues with outing people, so if you post people's emails, identifying details must be removed first. We good to go? If so, my profile and nonsexual (hobby related) photo is ready for upload. Yep, I'm fine with those conditions. Let's go ahead!

CynthiaWVirginia -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 3:40:38 PM)
*(Sorry for continued thread highjack but I dont see OP, and this seems to be the last issue to discuss before this thread falls into disuse.) samboct, all we can tell you is of our own experience here. If you believe it is mathmatically impossible then something is being left out of the equasion. Let me put it this way. Women in one group (like fish in a barrel), with men all around with pea shooters and spit balls. Does each man say, "Hey dude, there are three of us for every one female, so let's be fair and each of us shoot off only three spitballs, trying to hit a target." Some men choose to go after one or a few, while others dig out their gatling gun style spitball shooter and try to hit them all at least once. Some of us feel covered in spitballs. [:D] Men are more than just math formulas of what should logically happen.** The mention LadyPact made of that thread where VaguelyCurious helped SubPet715 to see what women go through at BDSM sites...I will also say this is the truth. In the first months that I was here I was sent enough unsolicited penis pix to repaper my bedroom. My bedroom is quite large, btw. I still remember one incident where a dear male friend of mine hurt my feelings...your disbelief on this subject reminds me of him. I was new, was told by friends that I was a sub and this other friend, who was like a brother to me, was Dom, so of course I turned to him to ask what I was supposed to do. I had never heard of the block feature, and it was...complicated. Someone I had been chatting with only in the public part of the Lobby chatroom said he was sending me a letter in my mailbox and swore it was just a pic of his face. I had a holy shiite moment when I opened the letter and saw a closeup of of his hips straddling his motorcycle instead...cock proudly out and stiff with a can of soda pop held alongside it for comparison. Yep, it was about the same thickness, so the man was trying to impress me. <rolls eyes> I felt disrespected, lied to, somehow threatened because of my PTSD and panic attacks, generally upset and so I turned to my friend to calm down. (If a co-worker of your sister or daughter or mother did this, maybe you would understand better how I felt in that moment. Blindsided. Horror. Soiled.) My brother type friend got hostile with me instead...because I had to be a big liar; cuz that fellow Dom was a close friend of his and his friend would NEVER do something like that. Many of your fellow men are not keeping to their daily quota of contacting only three females. Many of your fellow men are not reading profiles and journal entries and leaving thoughtful letters. The spam filter...was necessary. It was for a reason. It identifies mass mailings. Therefore, some people are sending out mass mailings. At this moment in my mailbox I have three long, copy and paste jobs to answer. Nothing in these letters shows any indication that one word of my profile was read...other than I am female and a target. I am a serious gamer obsessed with playing Pokemon...if one man even mentioned this in passing, or googled it to see what the heck I'm talking about, I would probably get dizzy and pass out. Have you taken a poll of how many males/females visit CM chatrooms? When I could access them, I was usually in one for 6 or more hours per day. I had private chat going on with at least 12 per hour. If most chats lasted for only 15 minutes instead of for an hour or more...some faces were the same, but most of those I chatted with were first time chats. Each woman would complain about getting hit with private messages that were not asked for and agreed upon in the room first. Often I've had a sentence meant for one person be highjacked into a new PM that popped up. If someone is talking with friends, getting demands for chats...and when politely declining being repaid by verbal abuse...it gets old. I even went off once and one of the mods said, "CYNTHIA!!!" and I had a small scolding follow. I had taken the drama into the main room, addressing the pest by username and telling them to leave me the frack alone already. Shortly afterward, I was taught how to block someone, lol. A am not lying. None of these other ladies here are lying about this either. I am sorry if you don't believe us...if your disbelief changed how things are...I would be grateful to you for feeling this way and encourage your disbelief. [;)]

thornhappy -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 3:58:24 PM)
Ah...well...a fine example of civil discourse. VC: you can only send a pm to someone with a profile. quote: ORIGINAL: barelynangel Wholly crap sam. If you are going to ride my ass at least 1) pull my hair and 2) have the balls to address ME. Or don't u have any? I have been on this site since 2004, my profile has been live on this site if you wanted to see it so badly you should have viewed it prior to my hiding it. Since you didn't its not my problem. I am sorry did I miss the memo making u someone of value wherein I have to explain myself? . What does having a profile mean anyway if u put much merit in them you are a fool. Next time have the integrity to address ME instead of talking about me. Others may think that is cool however by doing so to me especially with our over the top bullshit, you don't have the integrity of the hair that's on a mole on a pigs ass. I stayed out of the silliness however you just pulled me into it and you wanted a response you got one.

CynthiaWVirginia -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 4:08:45 PM)
This sounds fun, where will it be posted? I wanna copy! It would be fun seeing if we get the same letters. [:D] Peon, you're going to miss out on being fresh meat though... I've been reading that link at Fet, lol, too bad you won't be able to post anything there...unless LadyNTrainer decides to tell about this. I wish I hadn't deleted all those letters...the Nigerian ones were priceless...as well as the guy who kept referring to his rosebud as female non-rosebud stuff. Every other sentence he kept up the same old chant, to have me use his pssy as. He persisted even when I asked him to stop, as it was a major turn off for me. Peon, lol, what a shame if you miss out on the chatroom experience of being female, and count all the unasked for private chat invitations that pop up. Being in a chatroom will usually double the mail you get that day, even if all you are doing is acting like a Walmart greeter to those who say hello to all upon entering, and goodbye to those who announce they are leaving. It would be interesting to see what responses you'd get if any pm was answered by, "Sorry, but I am not accepting private chats right now." That alone causes some people to explode in rage. <now looks for the popcorn and soda pop>

kirsey -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 4:10:02 PM)
I think you already know what to do when you get mail you don't like: delete it and block the sender. A lot of it is spam that is sent out to many people at the same time. All of us have to deal with it continually. When you complain about rude mails and act like you're astonished and don't know what to do, it makes you sound peevish, attention-seeking and possibly unintelligent. I am not saying you really are those things, but your post puts you into a negative light that people might be reacting to. It's the equivalent of a male sub making comments that female Dommes only want money and are scammers. A male sub saying that would get a lot of negative attention, too. It would make him sound like he can't quickly weed out scammers by himself, or was just trying to goad people into an argument, and it would offend every female Domme reading his comment.

VaguelyCurious -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 4:22:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thornhappy VC: you can only send a pm to someone with a profile. Sorry thornhappy, but you are wrong; if they have posted on the forums then on the left of their post their will be a button marked PM with a little speech bubble next to it; if their profile is hidden then you can still message them using that button. Their profile does not have to be visible. Go check-there's a button next to angel's post just like everyone else's.

PeonForHer -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 4:44:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CynthiaWVirginia This sounds fun, where will it be posted? I wanna copy! It would be fun seeing if we get the same letters. [:D] I'm not sure it'll be that much fun, Cynthia . . . I'm particularly in search for the really ugly messages, rather than the dopey ones. I don't expect that it'll be a cheerful thread. The thread on FetLife, though - ah, that was a wince and a laugh, for the most part. Peon, lol, what a shame if you miss out on the chatroom experience of being female, and count all the unasked for private chat invitations that pop up. Being in a chatroom will usually double the mail you get that day, even if all you are doing is acting like a Walmart greeter to those who say hello to all upon entering, and goodbye to those who announce they are leaving. I tried chatrooms when I got my first ever internet connection, donkey's years ago. I hated them . . . all quick-fire drivel written in text-speak. I got put off them for life. Though it may frequently not appear to be the case, I like to be able to think before I write.

WyldHrt -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 5:19:16 PM)
I'd be careful posting actual cmails, Peon, as I think that is a TOS no-no. You might have to paraphrase instead. Make it like the 12 Days of Christmas: 12 Dick pics 11 Hi! and nothing more 10 Demands for strap on play 9 I'm in town, come to my hotel 8 You ugly c*nt! 7 Nigerian scammers 6 Loved your profile (but didn't read it) 5 Beautiful eyes! (if there is no face pic) 4 Command me, Mistress! 3 I want to lick your feet 2 TOS violations and... 1 honest, down to earth guy [:D]

PeonForHer -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 5:44:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WyldHrt I'd be careful posting actual cmails, Peon, as I think that is a TOS no-no. You might have to paraphrase instead. Make it like the 12 Days of Christmas: 12 Dick pics 11 Hi! and nothing more 10 Demands for strap on play 9 I'm in town, come to my hotel 8 You ugly c*nt! 7 Nigerian scammers 6 Loved your profile (but didn't read it) 5 Beautiful eyes! (if there is no face pic) 4 Command me, Mistress! 3 I want to lick your feet 2 TOS violations and... 1 honest, down to earth guy [:D] Seriously - a question to all - what are the proportions? Roughly what percentage are decent, albeit 'not quite suitable', as opposed to dopey, mad or nasty?

Twoshoes -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 5:50:46 PM)
Vacuum cleaners are rude. They: Ruin musical performances Disrupt your peace of mind Keep sucking up your change

DesFIP -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 5:55:49 PM)
Peon, it depends if you're talking about the first email or the one sent after you say no thank you. Guys who seemed nice enough but not compatible turned nasty in a heartbeat after being rejected.

samboct -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 6:00:47 PM)
Hi Cynthia Thanks for the thoughtful responses. I must admit, it does seem like we seem to be talking across each other. And to the OP- if you're still there or retired in disgust- yet another reason why rudeness flourishes on this site. Let me define polite email, since there seems to be some confusion on this point. A polite email involves reading someones profile, figuring out some common interests, and discussing them with the recipient and perhaps making a suggestion for further interaction. My comment is that these polite emails are now going unanswered. This reduces the utility of the site as a whole since the ability to meet like minded people for sex/romance/one night stands is diminishing. A site such as this needs a critical mass to function. Loss of that critical mass means that the site will no longer be viable. There are two reasons I've heard for why polite emails are going unanswered: 1) some women are so overwhelmed that they simply can't find the time to respond. 2) some women are scared of potential responses which are threatening/aggressive. N.B. I've focused on women's responses here, since it's clear that men initiate most email contacts outside forum discussion. Relating to these points are: 1) Spam- defined as mail unmatched to the recipient and sent out randomly. Length or content irrelevant. 2) The nonexistent suggestion to send polite responses to spam. 3) That some men may send aggressive emails if rejected. 4) That aggressive emails may be linked to rejections of men who make advances without reading profiles. Why rudeness thrives on this site? Attempts to solve this problem have been rebuffed. Let me reiterate some possible steps that can be taken: 1) Limit the number of emails that can be sent to new contacts in one day. 2) Provide a more visible tutorial on the tools on this site to block and delete spam and report unwelcome emails. 3) Develop a set of community guidelines or suggestions for both men and women. I think this thread clearly shows the problem is not the sole responsibility of either women or men on this site- it's due to the lack of responsibility that anonymity brings. Focusing on men or women as root causes leads to bathos and no progress. 4) Allow users more latitude to select what types of emails they wish to receive- perhaps based on MPAA ratings. For people that like sending cock shots, this would make sure that their recipients don't mind receiving them. 5) Perhaps block emails from senders who have not first read the profile of the intended recipient. 6) Limit emails to forum participants. Clearly the site administration has a challenging problem to solve. First- are these suggestions merely the result of an unhappy vocal minority and that the average user is content? Also-if FetLife is the competition (and from a business sense, it certainly appears this way)- then people who are happier sharing a community but are not actively seeking companionship may be happier on that site since it does not have the search features of this site. Implementing suggestions of people not actively seeking companionship might be counterproductive. To Angel Amazingly- I've found one thing we can agree on- I'm not Mr. Clean. He is taller, has a better physique, a deeper voice, and has a wardrobe which consists exclusively of white undershorts and slacks. However, I'm not quite as folically (stupid spell check) challenged as he is- and I have a mustache. Cheers, Sam

VaguelyCurious -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 6:01:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer Seriously - a question to all - what are the proportions? Roughly what percentage are decent, albeit 'not quite suitable', as opposed to dopey, mad or nasty? Well right now my profile is set to 'if I don't know you then fuck off and die' mode, so 100% of the first contact mail I get (forum posters excluded) is from people who haven't read my profile. Back when I had a more friendly profile I'd get maybe ten-ish people a week who had obviously taken time over their mail (that's a fairly generous count, I reckon), and 50-60 spam memos (being in the UK has advantages-I avoid the worst of the Nigerian scams etc, because they're more interested in the Americans...), although that was before the spam filter-now I maybe get 15-20 spam mails a week. Which is a massive improvement (thankyou CM [:D][:D][:D][:D]). So assuming I'd still get the same number of happy mails a week then if I put a welcoming profile up the happy to sad ratio would have been 1:5.5 pre-filter and would now be 1:1.75 post-filter. Although most of those ten would have been unsuitable in some way or other.

PeonForHer -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 6:08:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesFIP Peon, it depends if you're talking about the first email or the one sent after you say no thank you. Guys who seemed nice enough but not compatible turned nasty in a heartbeat after being rejected. See, that's what I thought. I'll admit I have a selfish interest, here. This is to do with questions like, 'How much does this taint your view of the male species as a whole? Do they all start to look that bit 'uglier' as a result? Have you caught yourself making a mistake - treating someone you've later realised is an OK guy, badly?' It wouldn't surprise me if so. If I'd had a string of vile cmails from women, followed by just one from a woman who was OK, I'd be on a hair-trigger with that last one.

VaguelyCurious -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 6:11:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: samboct Let me reiterate some possible steps that can be taken: [some good suggestions, some unworkable ones] ...or we could just allow people to sidestep all this by not making their profile visible, without accusing them of having something to hide. Which is what started this whole row in the first place. It's got to the stage now where I personally feel content with the measures the site is taking to stop spam. I do, however, fully understand why other people might not feel the same way, and it's their prerogative to take their own steps without you having a go.

VaguelyCurious -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 6:16:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer 'How much does this taint your view of the male species as a whole? Do they all start to look that bit 'uglier' as a result? I think the forums really help with this-my view of kinky internetz men is formed much more by you, Steven, RedMagic, Roch et al than by hit and run emails. quote: Have you caught yourself making a mistake - treating someone you've later realised is an OK guy, badly?' One guy springs to mind-he called my Fet profile esoteric when it was prettymuch blank-it turned out he meant my posting history and the groups I was in rather than the actual profile. I kind of bit his head off. I'm sure I'll run into him sooner or later at an event-if I do then I'll apologise in person.

PeonForHer -> RE: The need to be rude?!? (10/7/2010 6:22:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VaguelyCurious So assuming I'd still get the same number of happy mails a week then if I put a welcoming profile up the happy to sad ratio would have been 1:5.5 pre-filter and would now be 1:1.75 post-filter. Although most of those ten would have been unsuitable in some way or other. Those post-filter figures don't seem too bad. If you don't mind my asking: what proportion are aggressive and insulting? I'm focusing on these, particularly, because of CaringAndReal's earlier statement that 'For months now I've really dreaded seeing that I have email, because I know the ugly hostile mentally ill crap that will be in it'. I must say that's quite taken me aback.

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

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

7.226563E-02