I use another site with verification, but I hide all of mine, you can see I'm verified by a green tick, and to be honest as a single girl it doesn't effect chances either way if you are or not.
I use the verification process on there to support single guys who have got balls, there was a newbie who came to a "party" totally green, no idea what to expect and I thought fair play to him, there are other exampled of this and I think these guys should get a chance to be invited to other things, or to invite themselves and be accepted.
Therefore on this site I can hide anything they type about me (Some get a bit over eager) and they can choose to show what they want.
Then you get to the discussion of discretion, and I don't really want to know who's shagged who.... it can make it feel a bit seedy...
So to me if it happens, it happens and I'll keep verifying the cute guys, but I wont perv others "lists"
Mex
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
ideas for verifying members as genuine
Sex God
Quote by Cossie
Nope you just go to one of the SDC club nights which are all over the country, you don't even have to play.
Once you start chatting people will ask you your SDC user name
BINGO
one Validation
So..for example, I go to 1 of these club night's... and chat to you 'coz your there'.. i then go back and say.. 'I verify these people as i chatted to them in club XXX on saturday night'.
That doesn't mean for 1 minute that you will turn up to an organised 'meet' else where.
Verification systems are the biggest load of shite on any site. Paying or not.
Lil
i am a member on another site, and like i think ive said before i have reported 60 thats SIXTY profiles in the 2 months ive been on there as not being true.
those profiles were of verified members.
men who have a couples account and are no longer a couple.
couples who i know and have admitted their feedbacks are off mates or other members cuse " you just dont get a lok in here if you aint verified or have feedback"
couples who have been verified after being harrassed and abused as fakes "casue they aint verified"
single men who are infact married.
single females who are in fact males.
peopel who have more than one account verifying themselves.
and there should be a stupid twatter report feature for all the twatters who openly admit in the email they send me that i copy in to abuse report, they abuse the verification system.
ok out of the 60 i reported how many have since been adjusted or removed?? NONE.
regarding the reply that said its simple for new people to get verified simply turn up to a std?? some people dont like mass groups, or cant travel that far.
if the site decided to have a verification system then nothing said here will stop that.
what i do ask is please ensure there is a opt out system before it goes live and pre warn us its happening, i dont want the twatting verifications happening when im off line and come in to find info is on my profie and i cant even remove it.
i wont use a verification system and if people choose not to meet me due to that fact thats fine. im sure there are other swingers who will meet and talk to a single bi fem with no verification/feedback who will respect and return the value of privacy i enjoy.
i would just like to know that if i get harrassed for not being verified i can report them and action will be taken.
silver linings, if you catch any nasties at least it will save time you can just look at the persons feedback list and drop them a email advising them all to get checked out lol
its like a family tree for swingers lol
by the way i hate the proposed new look front page.
can we be informed if that goes live cuse i dont want my pictures or info being used as a advertising pull.
and i really dont want my profile to be one of those put on the front page as a hi lighted one.
again will it be a verification or a feed back? i guess just verification as we already have feed back in a manner of quickies, that by the way are not vetted and you can say anything you like even if its bullshit, if its positive the member will display it.
xxx fem xxx
those profiles were of verified members.
men who have a couples account and are no longer a couple.
couples who i know and have admitted their feedbacks are off mates or other members cuse " you just dont get a lok in here if you aint verified or have feedback"
couples who have been verified after being harrassed and abused as fakes "casue they aint verified"
single men who are infact married.
single females who are in fact males.
peopel who have more than one account verifying themselves.
and there should be a stupid twatter report feature for all the twatters who openly admit in the email they send me that i copy in to abuse report, they abuse the verification system.
ok out of the 60 i reported how many have since been adjusted or removed?? NONE.
regarding the reply that said its simple for new people to get verified simply turn up to a std?? some people dont like mass groups, or cant travel that far.
if the site decided to have a verification system then nothing said here will stop that.
what i do ask is please ensure there is a opt out system before it goes live and pre warn us its happening, i dont want the twatting verifications happening when im off line and come in to find info is on my profie and i cant even remove it.
i wont use a verification system and if people choose not to meet me due to that fact thats fine. im sure there are other swingers who will meet and talk to a single bi fem with no verification/feedback who will respect and return the value of privacy i enjoy.
i would just like to know that if i get harrassed for not being verified i can report them and action will be taken.
silver linings, if you catch any nasties at least it will save time you can just look at the persons feedback list and drop them a email advising them all to get checked out lol
its like a family tree for swingers lol
by the way i hate the proposed new look front page.
can we be informed if that goes live cuse i dont want my pictures or info being used as a advertising pull.
and i really dont want my profile to be one of those put on the front page as a hi lighted one.
again will it be a verification or a feed back? i guess just verification as we already have feed back in a manner of quickies, that by the way are not vetted and you can say anything you like even if its bullshit, if its positive the member will display it.
xxx fem xxx
And on that self same site you can be verified after just having spoken to someone on the phone, again no guarantee that they will turn up at a meet. A person can hide comments yes, and just show that they are 'verified' What does that prove? That they chatted on the phone, that they met someone once and then did not turn up for another 3 meets?
Very true, I don't like the web cam and phone verification options, it's not proper meeting to me, but when I type on a guys verification I met him, he turned up, he is worth inviting, they will put it on their profile, and hopefully, be allowed to play again.
So whilst I am not advocating it for me, it can be useful for single guys, especially in group scenarios...
Very true, I don't like the web cam and phone verification options, it's not proper meeting to me, but when I type on a guys verification I met him, he turned up, he is worth inviting, they will put it on their profile, and hopefully, be allowed to play again.
So whilst I am not advocating it for me, it can be useful for single guys, especially in group scenarios...
We are in favour of verification. We are members of 2 other swinging sites that have it, yes I know you can still be verified and be a twit but for us it works. As we have said before we prefer our meets to be arranged quick and rarely meet people again so the " whole gettting to know people " doesnt work for us.
We have been memebers of this site twice as long than the other sites but yet we have had more genuine meets from the other sites and I think that is mostly down to feeback/verification system.
Yes we would arrange to meet someone who isnt verified or chooses to opt out of the system but with all our meets whether verified or not I ( Tina ) always speak to the other woman on phone first.
We have been memebers of this site twice as long than the other sites but yet we have had more genuine meets from the other sites and I think that is mostly down to feeback/verification system.
Yes we would arrange to meet someone who isnt verified or chooses to opt out of the system but with all our meets whether verified or not I ( Tina ) always speak to the other woman on phone first.
Quote by Kff30
some things i have noted from a number of posts on here by members who are against varificaton
quite a few of these members say they are members of other sites wich have varification and they choose not to use it so why would it be a problem if it was the same on here ???
secondly ppl keep going on about a 2 tier system if the varification comes in we have that on here already how many profiles have you seen that says "no photos no meet" or "dont contact us unless you have a face shot" is that not a two tier system that has been self imposed by large numbers of members on here we are guilty of this we wont meet if ppl dont have photos or a cam
i have never seen a thread on here yet that says "its unfair not to meet members who have no photos" no one complains about that 2 tier system yet it has always been here
we all use photos and seeing ppl on cam as a form of varification they aid us in choosing who we meet
having a verification system would be another aid that would just help confirm members decided who they meet
i can not understand why so many members are against having a voulntry varification system if its some thing they have not got to use the only only reason they seam to give is they feel it would create a two tier system but as i have just pointed out dont we have that already ??
The two points highlighted in RED are preferences or requests and NOT verification.
Sexlightened
Hmmm, I feel we are getting far to indepth here. what do we want from a swinging website?
we want to meet people one our wave length, who we fancy and who are who they say they are.
The validation system works of us, due to say a couple who we know validate's a couple we don't know, we will have no problem just sorting a quick email and setting a meet up.
they know we know the other couple so there is no need for email tenis or MSN hell, we just meet.
if you get validated from one or more well known members you will be invited to every party lol
we want to meet people one our wave length, who we fancy and who are who they say they are.
The validation system works of us, due to say a couple who we know validate's a couple we don't know, we will have no problem just sorting a quick email and setting a meet up.
they know we know the other couple so there is no need for email tenis or MSN hell, we just meet.
if you get validated from one or more well known members you will be invited to every party lol
Quote by Cossie
Hmmm, I feel we are getting far to indepth here. what do we want from a swinging website?
we want to meet people one our wave length, who we fancy and who are who they say they are.
The validation system works of us, due to say a couple who we know validate's a couple we don't know, we will have no problem just sorting a quick email and setting a meet up.
they know we know the other couple so there is no need for email tenis or MSN hell, we just meet.
but dont you want to know any thing about them??
if you get validated from one or more well known members you will be invited to every party lol
now i know that was maybe said in jest,but why woudl you want to go to every party? ok i guess some might, but couldnt we find ourseves having memebsr seeking out meest or friendships with a well known member just to get the top verification?
what if you meet someone and they dont want to leave verification? does it make you feel pissed off, angery one notch isnt registering, left wondering why they didnt want to leave one?
is a genuine swinger or the best swinger based on how many shags you get/give?
i thought it was quality not all quantity?
will those who chose slower, prefer a select few than loads loose out?
when i say "you" imnot meaning anyone in in paticuler just in general "you"
xx fem xx
Quote by Deviants
would you buy a plasma tv fram eBay from a seller with only 3 feedback which are all negative?
would you visit a swingers club that had 50 reviews and 48 were bad?
Ahhh but thats exactly the point against the verification system.
The people for verification are very vocal in saying of course, if anybody negative rates you, then you can just delete it.
So your person selling the TV now has a zero rating. not -3. Still not gonna buy it?
The club now has a rating of +2 not -48. Any reason why you are not going to go now?
And not that I want to receive any verifications at all, but how would you verify me?
I am married to Dawnie - no shit the regulars cry. So I'm part of a couple.
But what about all the times I go to socials, munches or visit clubs on my own. Would I then get bombarded with "fake - not a couple" and such like.
And as for the two tier system about needing a certain number of ticks before you can go to an event, isn't the way a munch is advertised as
Quote by what is a munch
gives newbies a chance to ask questions of the more experienced
So newbies won't have any ticks.
Ian
Quote by CRASHTESTDUMMY
Randoms should not be able to neg you for no reason.
So, as Fabio so rightly mentioned. Munch / Social organisers should have the ability to negative strike a confirmed attendee who didnt show.
That would then give other organisers an informed choice as to add that person straight onto their guest list, or dump them on the waiting list and see if the event has space for them nearer the time.
I wont mention the 'random'thing above :gagged:
okayokay:
the eye tattooing wasnt a good one.
and anal branding wasn't so hot (what?)
how about we all accept that people will abuse (should they choose) any system in place... or not, as the case may be.
what about a register held by the Home Office though... nice and secure.
lp
okayokay:
the eye tattooing wasnt a good one.
and anal branding wasn't so hot (what?)
how about we all accept that people will abuse (should they choose) any system in place... or not, as the case may be.
what about a register held by the Home Office though... nice and secure.
lp
Quote by __random_orbit__
I wont mention the 'random'thing above :gagged:
okayokay:
the eye tattooing wasnt a good one.
and anal branding wasn't so hot (what?)
how about we all accept that people will abuse (should they choose) any system in place... or not, as the case may be.
what about a register held by the Home Office though... nice and secure.
lp
i think them home office have enough on their hands deleting and burning all their porn that will soon be illegal under the new act lol
i vote for the branding of the balls, but we must not take pictures
xx fem xx
Quote by Kff30
some things i have noted from a number of posts on here by members who are against varificaton
quite a few of these members say they are members of other sites wich have varification and they choose not to use it so why would it be a problem if it was the same on here ???
secondly ppl keep going on about a 2 tier system if the varification comes in we have that on here already how many profiles have you seen that says "no photos no meet" or "dont contact us unless you have a face shot" is that not a two tier system that has been self imposed by large numbers of members on here we are guilty of this we wont meet if ppl dont have photos or a cam
i have never seen a thread on here yet that says "its unfair not to meet members who have no photos" no one complains about that 2 tier system yet it has always been here
we all use photos and seeing ppl on cam as a form of varification they aid us in choosing who we meet
having a verification system would be another aid that would just help confirm members decided who they meet
i can not understand why so many members are against having a voulntry varification system if its some thing they have not got to use the only only reason they seam to give is they feel it would create a two tier system but as i have just pointed out dont we have that already ??
The two points highlighted in RED are preferences or requests and NOT verification.
yes they are preferences but we all use them to decide if some one is genuine or not we all use them to verifiy a member to some sort as i said how many ppl on here refuse to meet a member if thay have no photos on their profile i would say just about the whole site and if we had a option for verification on our profile that too would be a preference
By chatting to someone or seeing a photo, I am making the choices and not relying on anyone elses judgement. If you want to rely on other people then thats fine..........fill your boots
Dave_Notts
Quote by fem_4_taboo
I wont mention the 'random'thing above :gagged:
okayokay:
the eye tattooing wasnt a good one.
and anal branding wasn't so hot (what?)
how about we all accept that people will abuse (should they choose) any system in place... or not, as the case may be.
what about a register held by the Home Office though... nice and secure.
lp
i think them home office have enough on their hands deleting and burning all their porn that will soon be illegal under the new act lol
i vote for the branding of the balls, but we must not take pictures
xx fem xxwhy just the balls?
don't you lady-types have to be verified/quarenteened as well?
I have no porn, but then, I'm not in the home office
lp
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?
staffcple, I can't agree more with you - spot on IMHO. Verification will simply not work and it's unfair to newbies like us. As you said, a green tick would do nothing for me, for example:
"Darling, she's verified, quick get the lube out!"
"Ok hun!".
Not going to happen is it?!?!? We've a right to be choosy by our own standards and should be allowed to do so, a verification system provides no security whatsoever. The only thing a verification system will create is a panic to get verified.
"Darling, she's verified, quick get the lube out!"
"Ok hun!".
Not going to happen is it?!?!? We've a right to be choosy by our own standards and should be allowed to do so, a verification system provides no security whatsoever. The only thing a verification system will create is a panic to get verified.
Quote by Kff30
some things i have noted from a number of posts on here by members who are against varificaton
quite a few of these members say they are members of other sites wich have varification and they choose not to use it so why would it be a problem if it was the same on here ???
secondly ppl keep going on about a 2 tier system if the varification comes in we have that on here already how many profiles have you seen that says "no photos no meet" or "dont contact us unless you have a face shot" is that not a two tier system that has been self imposed by large numbers of members on here we are guilty of this we wont meet if ppl dont have photos or a cam
i have never seen a thread on here yet that says "its unfair not to meet members who have no photos" no one complains about that 2 tier system yet it has always been here
we all use photos and seeing ppl on cam as a form of varification they aid us in choosing who we meet
having a verification system would be another aid that would just help confirm members decided who they meet
i can not understand why so many members are against having a voulntry varification system if its some thing they have not got to use the only only reason they seam to give is they feel it would create a two tier system but as i have just pointed out dont we have that already ??
The two points highlighted in RED are preferences or requests and NOT verification.
yes they are preferences but we all use them to decide if some one is genuine or not we all use them to verifiy a member to some sort as i said how many ppl on here refuse to meet a member if thay have no photos on their profile i would say just about the whole site and if we had a option for verification on our profile that too would be a preference
That statement is incorrect as we have never had pictures on this site, but have met a few guys that it didn't matter too. As I have other means to verify who we are.
Quote by Kff30
some things i have noted from a number of posts on here by members who are against varificaton
quite a few of these members say they are members of other sites wich have varification and they choose not to use it so why would it be a problem if it was the same on here ???
secondly ppl keep going on about a 2 tier system if the varification comes in we have that on here already how many profiles have you seen that says "no photos no meet" or "dont contact us unless you have a face shot" is that not a two tier system that has been self imposed by large numbers of members on here we are guilty of this we wont meet if ppl dont have photos or a cam
i have never seen a thread on here yet that says "its unfair not to meet members who have no photos" no one complains about that 2 tier system yet it has always been here
we all use photos and seeing ppl on cam as a form of varification they aid us in choosing who we meet
having a verification system would be another aid that would just help confirm members decided who they meet
i can not understand why so many members are against having a voulntry varification system if its some thing they have not got to use the only only reason they seam to give is they feel it would create a two tier system but as i have just pointed out dont we have that already ??
Exactly my point too.
People are acting as if they will be forced to use the verification system IF it happens. They won't be!
I for one am sick and tired of wasting my time chatting to faceless people in the chat rooms, looking for meets, onlt to find out after a while they are neither genuine or after a meet.
This whole problem is brought about by peoples inabilities to be honest from the start. I for one get very wary when a profile has no pics or no profile filled out. Yes I know that does not mean you are not genuine but....it certainly shows that you are bothered. We are both in jobs where if recognised would make things difficult but, we still have pictures on our profile.
For me the sooner some kind of verification is brought in, the better for us.
Anything that can aid a more successful meet, and more chance that someone will turn up, is all the evidence I need,that it is a good thing for us.
We know people who chat for months before even considering a meet..endless MSN chats...endless camming. That is not for us. We feel the only way to really know if we want to play with others is to meet. But on that score we want to make as sure as possible that they will turn up.I feel a verification system would help that more than it does at present.
Quote by staffcple
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?
That depends on your perception of the word.
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. Like their car broke down even though he worked in a car showroom where he said he had access to any car he liked. You see he forgot he had said that one from the start.
We also know now that same guy did the same thing to another couple. The same excuse twice? From the same guy? Yeah right.
Or what about the " couple " with lovely pics on their profile but, I found out it was a single guy posing as a couple. Setting up meets as a couple, then obviously not turning up. You could say that is not a timewaster but someone who is not honest. Well if we had arranged a meet with " them" and they failed to turn up, then OUR time had been wasted, so on that basis it would constitute a timewaster....ours.
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, all be it by admin, and not every member. Funnily enough " they " are still showing as banned.
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 staffcple
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?
It depends on what type of verification could be used. I would like to see comments about how people actually turn up for a meet, rather than just about anything.
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?
Because people want it? Not all but quite a few that I have seen and a lot that I have to spoken too. What will work for some people will not work for others but....in OUR experience a verification system has worked, and we were more sure of somebody actually turning up, as they had been verified by others, saying exactly that.
It is not for everyone, but it works for some. So if it does work for some people, then having it can only be a good thing for those...no?
What I would say though, is that going by the poll the no's are catching the yes's up. On that score there surely is a case to answer regarding verfication. Even though the yes's are still in the minority, do minorities nowadays get the vote?
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.
Staffs.....I do not want a system where people can leave all sorts of bollocks about others. What I want is a simple " turned up as arranged ".
If a member has two or three of them on their profile, it would convince us that he was more likely to be genuine and TURN UP.
If I was a single guy, trying like thousands of others to land a meet, I would take that system. Guys moan all the time about not getting meets because others give them a bad press but....if a system was there that increased their chances of meeting, would they not take it?
As I have said before this is only being talked about because people are NOT honest. It is difficult enough arranging meets, and if this makes it easier for us, then I am all for not having to take a chance of having OUR time wasted.
Maybe someone in SH Towers, can enlighten us as to whether or not, this system could happen in the future. As at the moment it could all come to nothing anyway. But as BT say's...... " it's good to talk ".
If a member has two or three of them on their profile, it would convince us that he was more likely to be genuine and TURN UP.
If I was a single guy, trying like thousands of others to land a meet, I would take that system. Guys moan all the time about not getting meets because others give them a bad press but....if a system was there that increased their chances of meeting, would they not take it?
As I have said before this is only being talked about because people are NOT honest. It is difficult enough arranging meets, and if this makes it easier for us, then I am all for not having to take a chance of having OUR time wasted.
Maybe someone in SH Towers, can enlighten us as to whether or not, this system could happen in the future. As at the moment it could all come to nothing anyway. But as BT say's...... " it's good to talk ".
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.
Sex God
Maybe someone in SH Towers, can enlighten us as to whether or not, this system could happen in the future.
Kent, I get the feeling from some comments on this thread that we will have a verification system of some sort pretty soon. I'd be amazed if there hasn't been extensive discussion of it already in SH Towers. I have a feeling that the next 13 page thread on the subject will be us lot trying to thrash out just what kind of system we can all live with.
*sighs*
Neil x x x ;)
Sex God
Quote by staffcple
I have a feeling that the next 13 page thread on the subject will be us lot trying to thrash out just what kind of system we can all live with.
I'll wager that one goes a hell of a lot longer than 13 pages.
I'd say that's a definite odds-on bet. Hardly worth a punt on it Staffs. Best start typing all me posts for that one up right away, just in case I'm short of time when it comes round. ;)
Neil x x x ;)
