RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

pshornyguy -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:11:37 AM)

BITA:

Again, another straw-man argument.

For example: you wrote:

You are calling for a list to be compiled of screen names who are suspected of being liars or fakes (based on a 30 min conversation no less)

Please copy and paste the section of any of my previous messages where I stated or I even hinted that somebody should be listed based upon one 30-minute conversation.

If you cannot find such a message, will you at least have the decency to admit you have mis-represented my position and my proposal?

Then, after you make that gracious admission, would you please tell us why you are so emotionally invested in this discussion that you think it is totally acceptable to lie about what I believe?

As I have repeatedly stated, the list would be devoted to listing people who have revealed DISHONESTY in materially important ways.

Incidentally, just for your information, I am widely known in academic circles for my research into the McCarthy period and, in fact, my research has been praised by many of our nation's foremost scholars of that period because I have acquired FBI investigative files which have never been previously available. I mention this because your understanding of McCarthy's accusations is not factually accurate.


quote:

ORIGINAL: pshornyguy

BY DEFINITION, a genuine blacklist PREVENTS people from participating or becoming members or being employed -- simply because their name appears on a blacklist.



black·list   /ˈblækˌlɪst/ Show Spelled[blak-list] Show IPA
noun
1. a list of persons under suspicion, disfavor, censure, etc.: His record as an anarchist put him on the government's blacklist.

You are calling for a list to be compiled of screen names who are suspected of being liars or fakes (based on a 30 min conversation no less!) - the exact defintion of a blacklist and blacklists are against site policy.

You don't get it. That's fine. You're not going to get what you want either.. and that's even better.

Joe McCarthy thought he was doing good things, too.. he wasn't. He targeted 159 people, 150 of whom were innocent of his levied charges.

How many are innocent of your levied charges, Ernie? Is one too many?

What if 'you' are that one? Is it too many then?

I'm not into necro or beastiality, so I am bowing out unless you have some counter-argument to make that is actually logical. Coming up with your own defintions to try to fit things into little boxes just isn't going to cut it and I have better things to do on a Saturday morning in San Diego. Have a nice day, Ernie and I hope you fail miserably at what you are trying to accomplish here because "I" might be your next target.








amaidiamond -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:11:50 AM)

You mean like YOUR unwillingness to LISTEN to the fact that THERE IS ALREADY A COLLAR ME FAKES SITE



Lockit -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:12:50 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pshornyguy

Lockit: I made an observation based upon the substance of what you wrote. You then replied with an observation.

Your original message suggested that incompatibility could be used to describe someone as a fake. I explictly stated that incompatibility IS NOT a criterion.

So, that means your concern is not relevant to what I am proposing. If you have any objection which is based upon what I am actually proposing -- then let's hear it!

I very much want to hear objections to my suggestion. I have not made up my mind nor do I dismiss disagreements. But as I have pointed out repeatedly, many of the comments here are based upon false predicates.

Surely, you don't expect me to agree with people who are mis-representing what I am proposing do you? If someone misrepresents something you propose, would you just immediately affirm their comment because you would be afraid to be told that your mind was made up and you did not want to hear any disagreements?



I did not... repeat... I did not say anything about incompatibility. I didn't even intend to imply it. However, it doesn't matter what the reasons are. Your system could and would be abused and simply would not work for the reasons I did give. Stop twisting what people say and you might consider trying hard to not be so... what is it... obtuse.



amaidiamond -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:12:52 AM)

maybe hugeee font will get the point accross



stef -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:15:23 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pshornyguy

quote:

ORIGINAL: stef

quote:

ORIGINAL: pshornyguy

Then you still don't understand my proposal.

You're wrong.


Saying "you're wrong" doesn't make it so.

I know, I should have bolded that. I understand your proposal completely, it's still wrong. The fact that you're the only one here who thinks it's a good idea should be telling you something.

quote:

Your unwillingness to address my questions (for example) reveals more about you than me

I did address your questions. I'm just not the fan of endless repetition that you appear to be.



DarkSteven -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:16:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pshornyguy

Another straw-man argument which totally misrepresents what I have suggested. Apparently, you prefer arguing over non-issues more than actually addressing the specifics of what is actually being proposed.

Being "incompatible" has nothing whatsoever to do with what I have suggested. I explicitly stated from the beginning of this conversation that the issue is DISHONESTY not incompatibility.

Examples of dishonesty:

(1) You claim to be 43yo when you actually are 59yo.
(2) You claim to be 175# when you actually are 235#
(3) You claim that you want to become a slave -- when you have no interest whatsoever in becoming a slave
(4) You claim to be a submissive -- but you never want to be given direction or requirements
(5) You claim you want extreme chastity but, in reality, you want daily orgasms




1. Although not as extreme as your example, Cm does not automatically update when someone has a birthday. Many people have incorrect ages as a result.
2. It's not uncommon to enter weight incorrectly, by mistyping kg instead of lbs. I did it myself once. Link.
3. Can be caused by someone growing and changing and not keeping profile up to date.
4. Your definition of "submissive" is not universal.
5. That's weird but I'd decline to comment until I know more.



DomMeinCT -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:18:46 AM)

Maybe you're having trouble attracting the submissives that you seek because they're clicking the "view forum posts" in your profile and seeing that you've now hung in here for FIVE pages, arguing with other members and stubbornly insisting that your idea is sound.

Your interaction with real people here displays inflexibility, an argumentative nature, inability to listen to reason, and immaturity. Kisses of death to a woman seeking just the opposite.

Are you sure YOU'RE a real dominant?



sincelo -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:19:44 AM)

It is like having someone claim over and over that it is too bright out when it is the the middle of the night.
Him:It is too bright
Us: it is night time
Him: You don't understand. IT IS TOO BRIGHT
Us: Dude it can't be too bright because it is the middle of the night and it is dark
Him: It IS too bright. Why can't you all UNDERSTAND that?



pshornyguy -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:21:08 AM)

Is that site current? And updated regularly? More importantly, is it based solely upon the type of criteria which I have proposed, i.e. materially important examples of dishonesty -- and not all of the stuff which has been repeatedly mentioned in this thread which I am NOT proposing?

quote:

ORIGINAL: amaidiamond

You mean like YOUR unwillingness to LISTEN to the fact that THERE IS ALREADY A COLLAR ME FAKES SITE




DrkJourney -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:21:19 AM)

There are "fakes and liars" in all walks of life, however, some of the things that you consider a fake and lie, may not be the breaking point of others. Also, you may want to consider a few things.

Of course there are scammers here, there are scammers every where. For example, if you contacted me, your nik would trigger my spidey sense, that you are only here to "get off" as it were, and I would probably respond with a "no thank you". Now that is probably not your goal, but that is what "I" would think if I saw your nik in my inbox. I'd probably give you a chance, but what if you started to say things like other scam artists have said. You probably meant them in a whole different way, but there it is, in black and white "again". So would it be fair for me to put you on a black list?

You also may want to consider, that some people would not use the list as it is intended. Just because they didn't get what they wanted from someone or was mad at them for whatever reason, they would put a name on your list out of spite.

Might also consider, if they are a true scammer, the list will not stop them, they will simply create another nik and continue on, business as usual.

I'm sure a lot think I'm a fake because I refuse to IM or cam with anyone and I also refuse to give "examples" of what I would do to you if you were my slave (eye roll). Don't know how many times I've heard that one, but I can assure you there are people in this world who have been on the other side of my crop that would tell you different.

Oh here, the age does not change yearly like with some sites, you have to physically go in and change it yourself. Most people are like me, I make my profile and walk away, I rarely go back to it, and trust me, on my birthday, coming on CM and updating my profile is the last thing on my mind...lol

As for people getting back to you, doesn't particularly make them a fake, maybe they have things going on, and just haven't had the time. Maybe they have so many emails yours got lost in the shuffle, or maybe, as one movie states, "they are just not that into you" and they don't know how to say it without hurting your feelings, so they just don't respond again.

I have had my share of people playing with emotions, we all have, we just have to take the experience, learn from it, and try to avoid such things in the future, but unfortunately it's all a part of life, and chances are it will happen again. You also might consider, just because a person my treat you or maybe ten others in a negative way, they might actually click with number twenty and not treat them the same way.

Whether it's this site or out in the real world, it's going to happen, just got to keep trying until you find one that....isn't.



angelikaJ -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:22:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pshornyguy

I have no problem whatsoever with their rule. I am not proposing a blacklist. I am proposing an information list.

A blacklist (by definition) prevents designated people from participating. I propose no such thing.

Everything I propose is voluntary. A blacklist (by definition) is mandatory.

Nobody is penalized in any way by what I propose. A blacklist (by definition) requires explicit penalities in order to prevent certain designated people from doing what they want. I have stated explicitly, at least 5 times, that there would be no penalities of any kind whatsoever taken against either the fakes and liars or the people who wish to engage them in conversation.

In my proposal, everybody is totally free to do whatever they want. How does that become a blacklist?? Can you point me to any blacklist in human history where everyone was totally free to do whatever they want?


quote:

ORIGINAL: BlueEyedSubinDE

This message board is the property of the fine mystery folks at Collarme.  It belongs to them, it's their sand box.  Because it's their sand box, THEY get to make the rules for THEIR sand box.  THEY have decided that there will be no blacklists. 

So seems to me, you have two options - #1 follow their rules while playing in their sand box
or #2 ask for a refund and use that money to build your own sand box




You don't see it as blacklisting.
The site does.
Their house, their rules and your opinion does not matter in that regard.

You don't have to like it and you don't even have to participate, that is your choice, but if you are going to be here and not be miserable then you will have to choose to accept it and make it work under those parameters.

There are people who have identified me as a fake and my Master would disagree with them.
There are people here for whom our definition of Master/slave would be wholly unacceptable.
Relationships are defined by the people in them.

You have now spent 5 pages defending your position because listing people who fail criteria to you is not blacklisting.
Your need to be right about this is clouding your judgement.
Again: their house, their rules.

People telling untruths on the internet?
That can't be.... .

For many people those untruths allow them to escape the reality of who they are in their real lives for awhile.
And they have no plans of ever meeting anyone in real time so the lie is safe.
It doesn't make it right, nor fair but you do know that there are elements in life that aren't fair, I am assuming.

Changing the things you can, does not include changing the definition of blacklisting on this site.

Changing the things you can might be better served by becoming more savvy and discriminate when looking for partners online and not emotionally investing in someone that you haven't met.

edit: clarity



pshornyguy -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:22:57 AM)

So, my problem is that I am taking everyone seriously and responding and this exchange now consumes 5 pages? But if, for example, it were only 3 pages, then that would be ok?

OK--since you elected to respond on page 6, what conclusion should we now make about you?


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomMeinCT

Maybe you're having trouble attracting the submissives that you seek because they're clicking the "view forum posts" in your profile and seeing that you've now hung in here for FIVE pages, arguing with other members and stubbornly insisting that your idea is sound.

Your interaction with real people here displays inflexibility, an argumentative nature, inability to listen to reason, and immaturity. Kisses of death to a woman seeking just the opposite.

Are you sure YOU"RE a real dominant?




MissKittyDeVine -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:24:01 AM)

Oh for the love of all that´s kinky [sm=blasted.gif]



kalikshama -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:30:04 AM)

quote:

You have now spent 5 pages defending your position because listing people who fail criteria to you is not blacklisting.


6 pages, you LIAR!



kalikshama -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:31:42 AM)

[image]http://chzlolcats.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/funny-cat-pictures-finally-caught-a-mouse-it-was-fake.jpg[/image]



ChatteParfaitt -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:31:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pshornyguy

Well, the difference between you and I is this: I am not passive. I do not believe in the "grin and bear it" method of problem-solving. I always seek better ways to do things to accomplish some objective.




Uh huh, I'm not passive either. Nor do I allow pixels on a screen to control my blood pressure. This is akin to creating a blog and whining b/c you have to set filters to prevent spammers from destroying it with their spam.

This is a free site that deals with alternative and adult content. There is a reason why there are so many scammers and spammers here, it's b/c CM has taken the stand of allowing all to be here so as not to inadvertently filter out *anyone's* right to free speech.

Do you have any idea how easy it would be to embed every other web site's normal filters? It would cut down on a great deal of what you are complaining about. It would also cut down on millions of people who put the wrong keyword in their profile or forum post.

Frankly, I love CM for taking our freedom of speech so seriously on a free site. And yes, with all freedoms there does come some responsibility.

BTW: Your suggestion for deciding on who's genuine is just laughable. I don't respond to 99% of the messages I get. Since there are people on CM who have met me, I can safely say I am not fake.

Now, I don't expect you to agree with me. You seem to be a person who has to be right. So, well good luck with that.




LadyHibiscus -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:35:25 AM)

You are SO! FAKE! Miss Chatte! You and your spinach artichoke dip!



pshornyguy -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:35:42 AM)

ANGELIKA:

I am not trying to change the definition of blacklisting on this site. I am merely responding to criticisms made of me by you guys which is based upon a false premise.

I understand that the term "blacklist" is often used in a generic fashion to mean ANY kind of list...but rational people make distinctions.

For example: you can take the life of another human being but it is not appropriate or rational to always describe that as "murder". In both law and morality we make careful distinctions which produce different categories and different penalities.

Again, I understand why the site (and yourself) refer to it as a blacklist concept. I don't see how that could reasonably apply since there are absolutely no penalties which I propose.

As I am sure you know, all credit reports list things like liens and bankruptcies. Perhaps you think such listings amount to a "blacklist" -- but that information is intended to help people determine whether or not to grant credit, make loans, etc. and also what amount of credit or loan to approve.

My idea is somewhat comparable to that -- i.e. you give people information so that they can make an informed judgment about how much of their limited time to devote to someone whose history deserve caution because of dishonesty in their communications or in their profiles.

Maybe there is one thing I am wrong about here though:

I actually want to find somebody compatible with me who I can both love and trust to be in a long-term relationship. Anything that helps me (or others) facilitate that search is something I would approve. But perhaps others on this site do not have that objective?


quote:

ORIGINAL: angelikaJ


quote:

ORIGINAL: pshornyguy

I have no problem whatsoever with their rule. I am not proposing a blacklist. I am proposing an information list.

A blacklist (by definition) prevents designated people from participating. I propose no such thing.

Everything I propose is voluntary. A blacklist (by definition) is mandatory.

Nobody is penalized in any way by what I propose. A blacklist (by definition) requires explicit penalities in order to prevent certain designated people from doing what they want. I have stated explicitly, at least 5 times, that there would be no penalities of any kind whatsoever taken against either the fakes and liars or the people who wish to engage them in conversation.

In my proposal, everybody is totally free to do whatever they want. How does that become a blacklist?? Can you point me to any blacklist in human history where everyone was totally free to do whatever they want?


quote:

ORIGINAL: BlueEyedSubinDE

This message board is the property of the fine mystery folks at Collarme.  It belongs to them, it's their sand box.  Because it's their sand box, THEY get to make the rules for THEIR sand box.  THEY have decided that there will be no blacklists. 

So seems to me, you have two options - #1 follow their rules while playing in their sand box
or #2 ask for a refund and use that money to build your own sand box




You don't see it as blacklisting.
The site does.
Their house, their rules and your opinion does not matter in that regard.

You don't have to like it and you don't even have to participate, that is your choice, but if you are going to be here and not be miserable then you will have to choose to accept it and make it work under those parameters.

There are people who have identified me as a fake and my Master would disagree with them.
There are people here for whom our definition of Master/slave would be wholly unacceptable.
Relationships are defined by the people in them.

You have now spent 5 pages defending your position because listing people who fail criteria to you is not blacklisting.
Your need to be right about this is clouding your judgement.
Again: their house, their rules.

People telling untruths on the internet?
That can't be.... .

For many people those untruths allow them to escape the reality of who they are in their real lives for awhile.
And they have no plans of ever meeting anyone in real time so the lie is safe.
It doesn't make it right, nor fair but you do know that there are elements in life that aren't fair, I am assuming.

Changing the things you can, does not include changing the definition of blacklisting on this site.

Changing the things you can might be better served by becoming more savvy and discriminate when looking for partners online and not emotionally investing in someone that you haven't met.






Lockit -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:35:56 AM)

Fast reply

Okay... how real or realistic is it for someone that claims to be dom and claims to be here for the right reasons and bdsm... to be so negligent in what he wishes to do to a submissive? With HIV and medication, he wants a slave to drink his piss five or six times a day.

I call that ignorant and fetishist without common sense. What dominant in their right mind would do harm to their slave?

Maybe those that have spoken to you misrepresented themselves, but in my opinion, so do you.



angelikaJ -> RE: Fakes and Liars on CM (6/9/2012 10:36:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama

quote:

You have now spent 5 pages defending your position because listing people who fail criteria to you is not blacklisting.


6 pages, you LIAR!


I guess my Master will just have to punish me [:(]
[sm=crop.gif]



Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
4.980469E-02