Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
staffcple
Over 90 days ago
Straight Male, 53
Straight Female, 59
0 miles · Staffordshire
Forum
:worship: :thumbup: :thumbup:Quote by Dirtygirlie
I've been chatting to a guy whom I thought had a lot of potential. The chat has gone back and forward over the last few days and then suddenly he came out with something that made my skin crawl. That saved a me whole lot of time!
Jeez,
I only called you babe!
:mrgreen: Quote by Kff30
i posted this back on about page 9 its funny how many ppl are now saying the same things now about ppl not listening or even be open to compromise
this site is here for all of us it should be built around what all of us want its not hard to do its just hard for some to accept that ppl want change
And it would appear it's hard for others to accept that some of us don't want change?
Two sides of the same coin isn't it?
If you wish to have the site built around what 'all of us' want, good luck with that, because it'll never happen. I want the site to make my PC give me gold bars everytime I log on, not gonna happen, there will be people who believe that sending a message should lead to a meet and those who choose not to meet them are stupid and deserve to be run off the site, there will be others who want a feedback system, there will be others who want everything but the front page locked to un verified members, where does it end?
The question has been asked of the wider membership, I'll see what they say about it, I'm sure you won't get a concensus though, so as usual, the majority will rule which, while personally I would be disappointed to see a verification system bought in and have clearly and in reasonable terms stated my reasons why, is the only fair way to do it.
Quote by Rak
And the Palestinian struggle is? Palestinians are made up of Christian and Muslims aswell, both who opposed the establishment of Israel.
From what I understand, its the Israelis who believe that God promised them that land.
Well considering that both Hamas and Hezbollah are internationally recognised as 'Muslim' terrorist organisation's although from different sects (Shia and Sunni Islam),both use religious texts as both a recruiting tool and justification for their actions, both have in their charter the stated aim of the the destruction of Israel or the "zionist entity" and the formation of an Islamic state in its place, not to mention as you correctly say the Israeli belief that "God promised them the land" I'd say yep, it probably is a religious conflict or at least is rooted in religious differences.
I don't remember hearing the PIRA ever calling for a Catholic state, or shouting death to the Church of England......do you?
Quote by Deviants
we have already stated verifications wont stop timewasters, but it might cut in half the the amount of fake profiles around.
Deviant's.
Surely it will only cut down the amount of 'fake' profiles if it is a mandatory 'must verify' system and every last profile has to be verified?
Otherwise it's pointless.........and will cause a two tier site.
I pity the admins if this gets off the ground because boy are they going to be busy!
Experience tells me that if it is not mandatory, a lot of those with ticks will think anyone without a tick is to be avoided.
Quote by Cossie
Do notchange SH, its still works, but real swingers like us will not be loging in, for the site admin's this will not be a problem they will still get their money, but for us it will not be a swinging site just a networking site.
so change the name to "SOCIAL HEAVEN"
sorry but thats how I feel
Yes, it does work, so why change it?
Would that be for the 'real' swingers, who it seems are that 'real' they want to rely on what other people think of their potential playmates rather than make up their own untainted opinions.
"This won't cause a two tier site" people have said, your post say's different doesn't it?
What will it be next? 'Real' swingers have the tick?
What will that make anyone who desn't have the tick?
Fake? Men pretending to be women or couples? Timewaster's?
I have no pictures, my profile contains enough information to inform folk's I'm not actually here to meet anyone for sexual purposes, it will never have this much vaunted green tick or show any feedback whatsoever. Does that make me fake, or a timewaster? People may see my post's or talk to me in a chatroom, but as soon as they look at my profile they know the score.
I have been a member of this site for over three years, as part of a couple I have met people, Now due to circumstances beyond my control, I am in a situation where I probably won't ever swing again.
Why should I leave the site because of that? I have made friends here, I enjoy the cut and thrust of the forums, I like a laugh occasionally in the chatroom.
Should I leave because I do not swing?
In all honesty, if 'real' swingers won't log in simply because people are not interested in rushing to verify themselves as 'genuine' people, then imho, the site will be better off without the 'real' swingers. I'm sure the rest of the fake's and timewasters will still meet, go to socials and munches and have lots of fun.
Quote by Deviants
so in effect everyone already verifies themselves in some way or another but on the same token they dismiss verifications as being useless.
My point of view is simple,
Verifying a profile is useless for indicating whether or not someone is a 'timewaster'
For that you need feedback, with all of the associated problems that brings.
That's it in a nutshell.
Quote by Cossie
But the validation system will only work if the only people who can validate are payed up members and the monthly amounts should be quite high.
How high would you like them? £20? £30? £40?
I despair, really I do. Not only do you want a verification system that will not serve the purpose you and others want it to (rooting out and removing timewasters from the site) Your now actually advocating what? A raise in the monthly subs? Paying more to be able to validate?
Yeah, you sold me on it alright...... :giveup:
Kent,
It's a double edged sword.
Nothing allowed but good feedback, which realistically includes any system where people control which feedback they decide to show.
Timewasters will not be identified because no one is any the wiser, simply because of the feedback they might not be showing.
The only people that potentially lose are new members until they get verified and those who don't wish to have a 'I shagged them' list on their profile.
If both types of feedback allowed and if feedback is given it must be shown, good or bad, you'll have a bloody free for all. Someone gives negative feedback for a genuine reason I absolutely guarantee they will get it back, probably in spades.
Timewasters are not identified because no one will give bad feedback for fear of having their reputations ruined by people who will say anything to take the heat off themselves.
The people that lose out are those who give negative feedback for genuine reasons.
If you need any proof of how likely negative feedback is to be shown, have a look round the other site you mentioned, I will wager you won't find an awful lot of negative (there in pink btw) feedbacks and any you do find will be stupid ones about an abusive message or directing in the chatroom.
Are you seeing where I'm going here?
I'm pretty sure a system will be coming, as others have said, the "never's" have changed to "if's"
It's a double edged sword.
Nothing allowed but good feedback, which realistically includes any system where people control which feedback they decide to show.
Timewasters will not be identified because no one is any the wiser, simply because of the feedback they might not be showing.
The only people that potentially lose are new members until they get verified and those who don't wish to have a 'I shagged them' list on their profile.
If both types of feedback allowed and if feedback is given it must be shown, good or bad, you'll have a bloody free for all. Someone gives negative feedback for a genuine reason I absolutely guarantee they will get it back, probably in spades.
Timewasters are not identified because no one will give bad feedback for fear of having their reputations ruined by people who will say anything to take the heat off themselves.
The people that lose out are those who give negative feedback for genuine reasons.
If you need any proof of how likely negative feedback is to be shown, have a look round the other site you mentioned, I will wager you won't find an awful lot of negative (there in pink btw) feedbacks and any you do find will be stupid ones about an abusive message or directing in the chatroom.
Are you seeing where I'm going here?
I'm pretty sure a system will be coming, as others have said, the "never's" have changed to "if's"
Kent,
I'm going to ask one question.
How can a feedback system identify the 'timewasters' if it only allows positive feedback? That after all is the theory which is being proposed to justify this whole idea.
The obvious conclusion to draw from that system is any member without feedback will be judged as a 'timewaster' because they have no feedback and possibly ignored by those who do.
I'm going to ask one question.
How can a feedback system identify the 'timewasters' if it only allows positive feedback? That after all is the theory which is being proposed to justify this whole idea.
The obvious conclusion to draw from that system is any member without feedback will be judged as a 'timewaster' because they have no feedback and possibly ignored by those who do.
Well in that case I wish you well,
I hope if feedback is what people really, really want, that they as prepared to have their experience of the site ruined by it as they are to embrace it, because to be of any use whatsoever for the reasons stated, anyone receiving bad feedback should not be able to hide, change or refuse it.
Otherwise you have a system where anyone with feedback will have all good feedback, which is basically where we are now. Your timewasters will be no easier to spot than they are now.
Old proverb says:
"Throw enough shit and some will stick"
I'd ask everyone to bear that in mind, because in my experience of feedback systems on swinging sites, it will only take something as simple as not answering a message or telling somebody you don't want to meet them for it to start being thrown.
I hope if feedback is what people really, really want, that they as prepared to have their experience of the site ruined by it as they are to embrace it, because to be of any use whatsoever for the reasons stated, anyone receiving bad feedback should not be able to hide, change or refuse it.
Otherwise you have a system where anyone with feedback will have all good feedback, which is basically where we are now. Your timewasters will be no easier to spot than they are now.
Old proverb says:
"Throw enough shit and some will stick"
I'd ask everyone to bear that in mind, because in my experience of feedback systems on swinging sites, it will only take something as simple as not answering a message or telling somebody you don't want to meet them for it to start being thrown.
Quote by kent
That depends on your perception of the word.
Exactly, one persons time waster may be another persons perfect meet. So who decides what is a genuine reason, what is not and sorts out the disagreements?
Quote by kent
A timewaster to me is someone on here who, leads you to believe that they are looking to meet. You chat to them and ask the relevant questions. They tick all the boxes ( not in a litteral sense ) lol. Then a meet is arranged. Then the no show.
You phone them and get no reply, or in our case a wanker reply, as to why they did not turn up.
How is a green tick on a profile going to stop those people? After all a green tick (if i understand what people want it to be) tells you they are what they say they are, a 'real' couple, single female or single male. That does not tell you anything about their history of meets does it? To know that they do not keep to arrangements made, surely you would need some sort of 'feedback'? And with feedback comes score settling, grudges and bad feedback wars. Again, who sorts out false from true?
Quote by kent
That same " couple " I reported to admin and their profile was banned. As far as I know they were sent a message to say why they had been banned, and for their membership to be reinstated, they had to prove they were a couple. Now if that is correct, then a verification system was already there.
Well that simply begs the question, why do we need another one then?
Quote by
Iraq
Britain virus America
Britain turns up to search a house. They knock at the door, say what is happening. They are in fact heavily armed police. Britain is pulling out a job well done.
America beats down the door, knocks out the windows smashes furniture, and pull old men and women into the street. They are shot at far more than the b
British troops. At last the US Army have opened a camp to train personnel in the British style. This will now improve, but slowly. America have acted badly for to long in Iraq.
Israel have occupied to much land and behaved badly for to long. You can feel it on the streets. I did when I was there.
...and that is my last post on this thread!
And you really believe that's the only difference?
Seriously?
Nothing to do with the fact that the British army got the southern Basra zone where numerous attempted rebellions had been brutally put down by Saddam prior to the invasion? Whilst the American troops have to deal with Bagdahd, Fallujah, Tikrit and the other hotbeds of Ba'ath party support. And despite all this British troops are still targeted by IED's and snipers.
But again, it's a pointless comparison, the Israelis havn't invaded or occupied Gaza for three years before this.
Sorry your leaving the thread, I was quite enjoying it.
I'm just chuckling to myself here.
Any of you pro folks really think that a form of verification will get rid of 'timewasters' overnight? If paying to use the site didn't do it, why will a silly green tick or some such thing work better?
I asked the question a while ago, no one as far as i can see has answered it yet.
What is a 'timewaster'?
Define that (and good luck, because in four years on this site I've never seen a definitive description) you might have half a chance of weeding them out, but oh no! What if they get verified by somebody they have met? Does that mean for one second they are going to meet everyone they arrange to?
Any of you pro folks really think that a form of verification will get rid of 'timewasters' overnight? If paying to use the site didn't do it, why will a silly green tick or some such thing work better?
I asked the question a while ago, no one as far as i can see has answered it yet.
What is a 'timewaster'?
Define that (and good luck, because in four years on this site I've never seen a definitive description) you might have half a chance of weeding them out, but oh no! What if they get verified by somebody they have met? Does that mean for one second they are going to meet everyone they arrange to?
Quote by
I am happy not to be facing the IRA with guns and bombs in their hands...and that was not done by whole sale slaughter.
But surely you must see that is a completely different situation. PIRA (If you believe them) were fighting for a united Ireland, they were fighting to not be ruled by a foreign (as they saw it) government. Most of PIRA's activities were aimed at the armed forces and the economic and political apparatus, hence the reason they gave coded warnings when using IED's in civilian area's.
Hamas is not an indigenous Israeli terror organisation, they are in effect a government with their own 'state'. They are not concerned with having independence from a ruling government because they already have it, their aim is the destruction of a neighbouring democratic state and the 'return' of lands they believe were stolen from them. They do not give warnings, they target civilians indiscriminately, they use their own citizens to self detonate causing as many casualties as possible. A completely different set of tactics to achieve their aims, because to them it is what their version of God tells them to do.
Northern Ireland was not a conflict based on religion, no matter what people think.
And therein lies the difference and reason why any comparison is ridiculous. You can deal with an organisation who do not require your complete annihilation to achieve their aims.
What are the Israelis to do? March quietly into the darkness again without a murmur?
Quote by Dave__Notts
Laziness.
People like things to be easy for them. It is on the platter, they have paid for it and they can use others recommendations.
Quote by Fabio
bingo!
and there is your two tier system.....the haves and have nots
now put yourself back in the position of being newbies again, if all couples had the same attitude that you have now, then no newbies would never get meets.... or you just make it harder for them to integrate into the scene
And there in two quick answers is everything that is wrong with a validation system.
Quote by kentswingers777
On L Swingers it seems to work perfectly ok, and we have had some great meets from people who were verified, and you know what? Everyone of those people turned up.
I'm not slating you for having your opinion Kenty, but believe me when I say I have seen people's reputations absolutely destroyed and them driven from that site you mention through the feedback system they use. Not to mention the poilitics that go on..."You met so and so, we don't want to meet you" etc etc.
Again though, the system for verification on that site involves a female voice ringing an answerphone and leaving a profile number. That gains the profile a green tick, which means what exactly....you guessed it, a female rang a answerphone and said a few letters and numbers. It does not prove anything else.
Quote by Cossie
You don't have to accept a validation
so your rep cannot be tarnished, what it does give you in the most part, that your a real swinging couple and that is the most important part
Then as far as weeding out timewasters goes, which seems to be the major wish behind a system being introduced, it cannot possibly make a damn bit of difference can it?
The real timewasters don't publish any bad feedback they recieve, so no one else knows they are timewasters anyway and as others have said, the fact that you are a 'genuine' couple/single male or single female bears no relation on whether you are a timewaster or not.
So again, what's the point?
Quote by
Hated, who cares? Ask the next generation. The answer is simple, put in covert teams. Take out the rocket teams, but that would be dangerous. Better to kill those who just want to live in piece....so their families join the fight.
What would have happened if we bombed towns over the boarder, just to get IRA members?
Think about the problems that an Israeli special forces team would face operating inside Gaza.
Different ethnicity, different language, no access to support or re supply, not to mention the logistical problems of locating, tracking and assaulting the 'rocket teams' who most of the time only show themselves just before setting up and firing.
How many teams would you suggest they use, Gaza is an area of 150 sq miles if I remember correctly? Every building or open space can be used as a firing point.....still seem a good idea?
Far easier and infinitely more sensible to have unmanned drones on constant recon, supported by strike aircraft on combat air patrol who will find and attack the target within 5 minutes of it being identified.
I'm sure the next generation of Israelis will swap being hated for being alive, what do you think?
It still won't work.
Meh, what do I care. People will find out on their own when you see it used to ruin reputations.
Oh hang on, your advocating a system where negatives are not allowed.
So their will only be two types of people then....those that have no verification and those that have good ones. How does that help spot timewasters?
One question then.......
The point of that is?
Meh, what do I care. People will find out on their own when you see it used to ruin reputations.
Oh hang on, your advocating a system where negatives are not allowed.
So their will only be two types of people then....those that have no verification and those that have good ones. How does that help spot timewasters?
One question then.......
The point of that is?
Quote by
Israels backer are not loved by all, therefore antone who stands against them will have friends.
As for the six day war Israel rewrote the book on tank war. It was a considered campaign. This campaign is straight out of the American book, bomb everything in sight, them wonder why they are more hated.
Exactly, the Palestinians are used as surrogate's to sting the elephant because the Palestinians 'friends' don't have the bottle to do it themselves.
Fine choice of friends that.
It's a different campaign because it's a different type of conflict, one fought in a built up area, tactically tanks are not the best weapons for fighting in urban areas.
Air power is. Ground troops are. Sensibly, you do not waste troops by throwing them against strong points or occupied buildings without a little 'softening up' first. Now unfortunately, you don't drop 500 or 1000 pound bombs into a built up area without other buildings getting damaged, which in truth is probably where most of the civilian casualties are coming from. Even precision guided weapons which have a CEP less than 30 feet will still create a blast wave more than strong enough to drop anything else around it's target.
Hmmmm, the Israeli's hated? Do you think they care? Or is it fair to assume all they want is the rockets to stop? Both sides are to blame, this is the culmination of a series of actions from both sides, imho it's going to get worse before it gets any better.
Ok,
You wish to have a system that flags up 'time wasters'
Define a 'time waster'
Then think about all of the possible, plausible and perfectly valid reasons why people do not show up when arrangements have been made.
Then think about the ways it can be abused.
Then remember this is a pay site, people have paid to use these facilities in whatever way they see fit, within the AUP.
No verification system is foolproof, no verification system is better than your intuition and feeling.
You wish to have a system that flags up 'time wasters'
Define a 'time waster'
Then think about all of the possible, plausible and perfectly valid reasons why people do not show up when arrangements have been made.
Then think about the ways it can be abused.
Then remember this is a pay site, people have paid to use these facilities in whatever way they see fit, within the AUP.
No verification system is foolproof, no verification system is better than your intuition and feeling.
