quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: pshornyguy

I don't have "several profiles" on CM. I said I am contacted my many people because of all the profiles I have on other websites.

I also mentioned that all my profiles contain the same information so there would be no basis for somebody listing me as dishonest in that respect.

Why do you guys have to resort to deliberate falsehoods about me? Can't you make your best case without resorting to that? What the hell is wrong with you?

Ok, I know I said I was done with this thread, but I just can't help it.

How do we verify you are a liar? Read all your own profiles and then look at the bolded statement above.  Then find yourself a mirror.  "Many people" are contacting you, anxious to involve themselves in activities that could result in their death?  Delusional much?

Again, your profile here (and everywhere if they are all the same) are begging for scammers to contact you.  You come off as completely sex driven, which is what they look for.  Desperate people do desperate things.

There is no way you are contacted by "many people" as you say.  Add to the above your absolute argumentative nature and inability to grasp simple concepts and anyone who did contact you will soon just "poof" because they realize if they tried to explain anything to you, you would never shut up.

You have been here a year.  I have been here, in some permutation or other since 2004.  I have seen people like you rant, whine and complain about fakes and liars more times than a teenage boy masterbates. 

The bottom line remains this: 

You have been told by nearly every regular poster in this forum that your "suggestion" is not only serious flawed, but given examples of how it won't work.

You have been told by a Moderator of this site, who actually works on trying to put strategies in place to improve the site, that your "suggestion" is seriously flawed, and it won't work, again with examples.

You have set yourself up, by the words in your own profile to be a target for scammers, yet all suggestions of this fall on deaf ears.

We get it, you don't like people who you perceive as disingenuous.  You expect people to follow through with what they say they will do.  You are unable to accept the reality that it doesn't happen and is part of life.

Please, in the name of all that is holy, stop trying to get people to accept your concepts and suggestions.  You talk on and on about time wasters, but apparently you have far too much time on your hands.  All of us who have posted to you have not done so because we have no lives outside of the computer.  We have posted because, for me, it is a rainy day, I've been sick for several months and I really don't have anything better to do.  You have been no more than a source of entertainment.  It is doubtful anyone on this board is ever going to look seriously at anything you post in the future because of this post. 

Please, please, PLEASE, go to one of the "many other" sites where you have the exact same profile, and complain to them for a while on their message boards.  See if you can get different results.  But remember what they say, "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."

Time for me to take the last of my painkillers and relax.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Master2811

From what I read of this thread is this: OP comes with suggestions to improve this site. NO NO NO, the regulars are very satisfied with a site full of liars, scammers and the like. Like an angry mob in a farmers village they come with their pitchforks trying to scare the OP away. I also read threads about how tolerant we must be. Totally laughable the hypocrisy.

Nope. These issues have already been addressed by the owners of this site to their satisfaction.....whether you like it or not. When you own a site you can deal with it however you see fit.

Part two: The fact that your post about fakes was also shot down clearly has made you bitter.

Part three: Tolerance does not equate blindly following someone else's suggestions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pshornyguy


My point is this: Suppose you ask to see somebody's pics and they send you 3 pics. Suppose, further, that you ask them how old their pics are and they say they all were taken within the past 6 months.

Then---suppose you look at 2 other websites where that same person has a profile and the pictures they have posted on those 2 other sites are obviously totally different people.

In fact, suppose (as many sites do) you can see the date when their pics were uploaded and it is within the same 6-month period (give or take a few months) but you notice totally different hair, a different body structure, a different face, maybe even different shaped eyes or nose etc. In short, the other profiles contain pics of two entirely different persons from the pics you were sent.

Obviously, that would be evidence that the person you are chatting with has been dishonest because you would not know which of all those pics (if any) are valid.

quote:

OK. Your first line: apparently the "owners" of this site have not addressed this issue properly. If they had it would not be an issue anymore.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pshornyguy
lafayette lady: Give me your email address

quote:

ORIGINAL: amaidiamond

quote:

OK. Your first line: apparently the "owners" of this site have not addressed this issue properly. If they had it would not be an issue anymore.

The Owners have addressed the issue as they see fit.. If that is not good enough then don't let the door hit you on the way out...

quote:

ORIGINAL: pshornyguy

Notice that ONE person agrees with the predicate of my discussion and Stef immediately wants to discredit him because even ONE person not sharing her views is unacceptable.

quote:

Nevertheless, then Stef has the gall to write:

"Being tolerant does not mean blindly agreeing with bad ideas, faulty logic and dangerous medical advice."

So...as long as you agree with Stef, everything is fine. But if you challenge any of her premises or conclusions, then you are using "bad ideas and faulty logic".

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyLeandra

quote:

ORIGINAL: pshornyguy


My point is this: Suppose you ask to see somebody's pics and they send you 3 pics. Suppose, further, that you ask them how old their pics are and they say they all were taken within the past 6 months.

Then---suppose you look at 2 other websites where that same person has a profile and the pictures they have posted on those 2 other sites are obviously totally different people.

In fact, suppose (as many sites do) you can see the date when their pics were uploaded and it is within the same 6-month period (give or take a few months) but you notice totally different hair, a different body structure, a different face, maybe even different shaped eyes or nose etc. In short, the other profiles contain pics of two entirely different persons from the pics you were sent.

Obviously, that would be evidence that the person you are chatting with has been dishonest because you would not know which of all those pics (if any) are valid.

Wait...but what qualifications are we using to determine if that other profile is even the same persons? I know my screen names are used on other sites by other people. There is another Lady Leandra out there (Which I didn't realize when I started this) who is older than me and not into the same kinks. We don't run in the same circles so theres no reason either of us should have to change our names, just say "No thats the other Leandra". But what if someone doesn't believe me (or several someones) and calls foul? Thats the THIRD reason I would end up on your precious list. OMG I must be a HORRIBLE person!

Also, whats to stop me from taking a sub that ticks me off and gathering a group of my friends to start bashing him on this list, spread out over a bit of time to make it look better?

In short, what safeguards do you propose for your blacklist (see my last post for the definition of blacklist before you start crying foul again), to keep honest people off of it, and to ensure that the dishonest can still have "Complete freedom to do what they do" without the list affecting their activities?

quote:

ORIGINAL: stef

quote:

ORIGINAL: pshornyguy

Notice that ONE person agrees with the predicate of my discussion and Stef immediately wants to discredit him because even ONE person not sharing her views is unacceptable.

Making up more "facts", Horny? Weren't you crying about people doing that earlier? At least your consistent in your hypocrisy.

quote:

Nevertheless, then Stef has the gall to write:

"Being tolerant does not mean blindly agreeing with bad ideas, faulty logic and dangerous medical advice."

So...as long as you agree with Stef, everything is fine. But if you challenge any of her premises or conclusions, then you are using "bad ideas and faulty logic".

When you're the only person who thinks your idea is a good idea, that is usually a warning sign. Most people with the tiniest shred of common sense would heed that warning.

By the way, I don't suppose you got permission from all those users whose names you posted before outing them, did you? Bad form, Horny.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pshornyguy

LadyChat: I am not refusing to address anything. Sometimes I just ignore rhetorical excesses or things which are not likely to be typical occurrences and, therefore, don't require serious consideration.

I cannot possibly (anymore than you could) address every conceivable variation or every imaginable circumstance.

All of the examples you cited are exceptional circumstances (car wrecks. severe weather problems, physically moving from one state or city to another). These are not things that routinely occur every day or every week or every month nor would multiple people be likely to challenge your honesty -- especially if you were in an ongoing conversation with them and you shared such details about your circumstances.

WATERSPORTS: Again, you are using a stupid example. My list is not going to be used because you choose NOT to engage in a particular sexual activity with somebody. Again, I keep repeating the same criteria over and over again. You would have to exhibit a consistent PATTERN OF DISHONEST behavior -- and that pattern (to make derogatory assertions potentially credible) would be noticed and commented upon by multiple people over different periods of time.

I love watersports! It is my favorite sexual act -- other than cuddling/snuggling with someone whose company I enjoy. But if I chose not to engage in piss-play with ONE person or even TEN people that would NOT be DISHONEST behavior.

What would be dishonest behavior is if I state in my profile that watersports is one of my favorite activities but then I tell people during my chat messages or emails that I hate watersports---because my profile is an entirely fictional creation!

AGE: If somebody lists themselves as 32yo on CM but you check another website which shows that the profile was created one year ago and at that time they claimed to be 25yo -- don't you think something is phony???

PHOTOS:
You missed my point (I think deliberately because you just want to argue with me).

My point is this: Suppose you ask to see somebody's pics and they send you 3 pics. Suppose, further, that you ask them how old their pics are and they say they all were taken within the past 6 months.

Then---suppose you look at 2 other websites where that same person has a profile and the pictures they have posted on those 2 other sites are obviously totally different people.

In fact, suppose (as many sites do) you can see the date when their pics were uploaded and it is within the same 6-month period (give or take a few months) but you notice totally different hair, a different body structure, a different face, maybe even different shaped eyes or nose etc. In short, the other profiles contain pics of two entirely different persons from the pics you were sent.

Obviously, that would be evidence that the person you are chatting with has been dishonest because you would not know which of all those pics (if any) are valid.

I AGREE with your final comment about using your own head to make evaluations. All I am proposing is providing some information to help you make informed decisions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pshornyguy

Lady Leandra:

(1) You raise very good points!

(2) My question to you however, is why would a CM member specify other websites where they have profiles if those profiles do not correspond to their CM profile i.e there are materially significant differences in data or photos?

(3) In the context of my discussion here, such discrepancies could be noted and would provide a CM member with an opportunity to present questions to the person he/she is chatting with such as: why are your pics significantly different on the other websites with your profiles that you told me about? OR why is your age on CM 32yo but on website #2 (which you created one year ago) you stated your age to be 25yo?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

So you are gay? And so you want to blacklist fakes and liars who pretend to be gay?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Master2811

You look like a Gulag Camp guard who says Stalin ordered it this way and if you don't like it..........

It shows how tolerant you actually are.