Quote by vdub
What if I advertise an invite only party on multiple boards.
Why would you want to advertise an INVITE ONLY party on any board, surely you just INVITE em?? :confused:
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
socials and private party guests lists approval
last reply
110 replies
5.0k views
0 watchers
0 likes
Quote by Fun Scottish Couple
As the mods are privy to the reasons why people are banned,then we must take their word for the reasons of the ban,As many are aware this a certain ex-member was one of the reasons for the current rule set up on SH..if i remember correctly threatening members with violence and disrupting munches and socials was his Mod team decided for the safety of the members of this site to bring in this new rule...
I understand that bit but where does it say on this rule a guest list must be handed to admin or a mod? i've looked and cant seem to find it? although i did find the definition of a banned member which is any at the time even if a 24 hour ban for whispering or directing in chatrooms or simular.
because there maybe members of this site that need to be warned of any banned members that are going, mods can then let relevent people know,if their is history between the individuals...so they can decide wether to go or not.
I understand that but I was enquiring to where to find the ruling that states you must hand a guest list to admin or a mod if requested, I’m all for following rules but sorry I can’t find that in the rules anywhere and if it is surely it should be in print for everyone to see, but what I do know is a member was banned for refusing to hand a guest list over to a mod and the said event hadn’t even took place, so can you be banned on the assumption you may invite a banned member? It’s ok you commenting on these rules but where are they as I can’t find them on this site?
there isn't a rule that you have to hand over a guest list, but to just inform the Mod Team that a banned member is attending....so the advertising thread can be removed from the page.
http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/swingers-forum/viewtopic/65788.html
Thanks for trying to help me understand all this but to be honest i'm still no further forward, but can you tell me if theres no actual ruling on it then what was all this about http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/swingers-forum/viewtopic/89926.html
what Dawnie was offering was a solution to the original posters dilemma....nothing actually set in stone,as to saying you have to hand over a list.
Quote by vdub
there isn't a rule that you have to hand over a guest list, but to just inform the Mod Team that a banned member is attending....so the advertising thread can be removed from the page.
Right? And how do you cover events which pull people from other places? Say I invite someone that I meet from a club - I'm under no obligation to demand information from them relating to their SH activities. And, more to the point, there are most certainly not under any obligation to give them.
if you met someone at a club......you couldn't just invite them to a social or munch!....everyone knows that!
Sex God
I post this as a site member, not an op and for the sake of any confusion, Op’s have absolutely no input into Munches or Socials on the site.
Site Munches are, as has been stated many times, run under the banner of an SH event. In those circumstances, strict rules and guidelines are laid down with regards to attendees and quite rightly, those who have been banned from participating on the site are banned from attending an event held under the SH banner.
That, again in my opinion, is right and proper.
Where someone decides to hold a social or private party then out of courtesy to other guests it would be prudent to mention during the advertising period that a member who is / may be banned will be attending the party and make a list of attendees available to whoever asks for it, providing of course that they themselves have asked to attend. As far as I’m aware that has happened on occasions before and seems to work just fine.
If there was no list of attendees posted then I personally would be asking for one and if it wasn’t forthcoming from an organiser then I’d have alarm bells ringing.
Lets face it, we all know of one or two people who have been banned from sites for things we may not agree with and, in similar style, we also know of some who should have been castrated as well as banned. We’re all adults, if we are happy to attend a private party where such a person is also attending then so be it.
That’s my look out not SH’s.
Members get no guarantees of the character or safety of arranging to meet up with the SH member “Shag-u-silly†who joined two hours ago and has posted in LMU for a “night of serious fuckingâ€. The guy could be an absolute nutter. People meeting him do so at their own risk but the choice to meet with him for said “serious fucking†is their choice and on their head be it.
I personally don’t agree with the whole policy of “Private party guest lists†being handed to a Mod for checking, regardless of the DPA argument, I don’t see how it’s anyone’s business, other than those attending, when it’s a private party.
SH Munch yes, but not a private event.
Like I said, individual members who advertise in LMU are not vetted before hand to guarantee members safety are they?
I don’t think it’s a topic that’s been done to death. It obviously needs airing and the café is the best place to do that.
If I’ve learnt anything about the new site owners then it’s that they do want the site to work and are willing to listen to people’s point of view. They may not always take it on board but that’s just the nature of the beast in business isn’t it.
the Laird
Site Munches are, as has been stated many times, run under the banner of an SH event. In those circumstances, strict rules and guidelines are laid down with regards to attendees and quite rightly, those who have been banned from participating on the site are banned from attending an event held under the SH banner.
That, again in my opinion, is right and proper.
Where someone decides to hold a social or private party then out of courtesy to other guests it would be prudent to mention during the advertising period that a member who is / may be banned will be attending the party and make a list of attendees available to whoever asks for it, providing of course that they themselves have asked to attend. As far as I’m aware that has happened on occasions before and seems to work just fine.
If there was no list of attendees posted then I personally would be asking for one and if it wasn’t forthcoming from an organiser then I’d have alarm bells ringing.
Lets face it, we all know of one or two people who have been banned from sites for things we may not agree with and, in similar style, we also know of some who should have been castrated as well as banned. We’re all adults, if we are happy to attend a private party where such a person is also attending then so be it.
That’s my look out not SH’s.
Members get no guarantees of the character or safety of arranging to meet up with the SH member “Shag-u-silly†who joined two hours ago and has posted in LMU for a “night of serious fuckingâ€. The guy could be an absolute nutter. People meeting him do so at their own risk but the choice to meet with him for said “serious fucking†is their choice and on their head be it.
I personally don’t agree with the whole policy of “Private party guest lists†being handed to a Mod for checking, regardless of the DPA argument, I don’t see how it’s anyone’s business, other than those attending, when it’s a private party.
SH Munch yes, but not a private event.
Like I said, individual members who advertise in LMU are not vetted before hand to guarantee members safety are they?
I don’t think it’s a topic that’s been done to death. It obviously needs airing and the café is the best place to do that.
If I’ve learnt anything about the new site owners then it’s that they do want the site to work and are willing to listen to people’s point of view. They may not always take it on board but that’s just the nature of the beast in business isn’t it.
the Laird
Sex God
Lairdy Do internet user names come under the DPA because that is all they ever ask to see. Nothing more and they already have access to them so I can't see where data protection comes in.
I was under the impression that the rule was, you couldn't advertise an event that would have a banned member attending, and that you would be prepared to confirm that none were attending or remove the ad if questions were raised about it.
My personal opinion, it depends. (Sit on that fence girl)
In the past many social organisers expected the site to take action if someone misbehaved at an event, if that is still the case, I can understand the rule as to why they don't want events with banned members at them advertised here.
If I was organising an event I'd be unhappy about the rule as I have friends in different places; banned in various directions; and so I would want to advertise in more than one place. That would make me a rule breaker, but only here though.
Jas
XXX
because that is all they ever ask to see. Nothing more and they already have access to them so I can't see where data protection comes in.I was under the impression that the rule was, you couldn't advertise an event that would have a banned member attending, and that you would be prepared to confirm that none were attending or remove the ad if questions were raised about it.
My personal opinion, it depends. (Sit on that fence girl)
In the past many social organisers expected the site to take action if someone misbehaved at an event, if that is still the case, I can understand the rule as to why they don't want events with banned members at them advertised here.
If I was organising an event I'd be unhappy about the rule as I have friends in different places; banned in various directions; and so I would want to advertise in more than one place. That would make me a rule breaker, but only here though.
Jas
XXX
Sex God
Quote by da69ve
no one is trying to control anything....SH just won't let you advertise a Social or Munch if banned members are attending.....how simple can that be.
its not quite that simple Dave, how do i know who is banned and who is not, what if i have on my guest list a non member of the site, or maybe that non member is a member but im not aware , i know them as" Harry" and everyone else knows them as "tiger 645"
if you arrange meetings under the banner of "swinging heaven social", or "swinging heaven munch " then fine rules is rules, but when has a private party been a swinging heaven private party? and how private is it when to identify possible banned members before the event a guest list would have to be handed to the mod team, id be damned if i should be the one handing out what would be other peoples private details.
This rule needs amending, the onus should be on the attendees to be confident of the guest list suitability and not the job of the mods to police them, or i will return to the argument of whats the difference between my guest list and the guest list of lets say for sake of argument a Rios or Chams meet? You cant have it both ways , unless you are happy in it not making sense!
I agree a guest list should be available to anyone attending if the organiser chooses to do one, i would suggest that attendees take it upon them selves to ask to see the guest list if they wanted to, but i can see no reason why it should be presented to the moderators of this site for their approval, just because thats the rule is fine for now but the rule should be changed and changed soon.
keep your rules for sanctioned events if you want , i think thats foolhardy too btw, opens the site up for legal action should something go wrong perhaps but thats admins business isnt it.
wrats
xx
Sex God
Hi there
I have read quickly thru this thread so forgive me if I'm barking up the wrong tree here.
From what I can see, the issue is not (as far as SH is concerned) about whether you have a banned SH member coming to your private party/social, its about you not being allowed to ADVERTISE it on SH if you have and want to have full control/responsibilty for your guest list.
So in a nutshell if you don't want anyone asking about your guestlist in case you have a banned member attending or something similar, then don't advertise it on SH. As far as I can see SH have a responsibilty of sorts to keep their members as safe as reasonably possible which is probably why this discussion is taking place.
Love
FIRE xx
I have read quickly thru this thread so forgive me if I'm barking up the wrong tree here.
From what I can see, the issue is not (as far as SH is concerned) about whether you have a banned SH member coming to your private party/social, its about you not being allowed to ADVERTISE it on SH if you have and want to have full control/responsibilty for your guest list.
So in a nutshell if you don't want anyone asking about your guestlist in case you have a banned member attending or something similar, then don't advertise it on SH. As far as I can see SH have a responsibilty of sorts to keep their members as safe as reasonably possible which is probably why this discussion is taking place.
Love
FIRE xx
I've asked this question once and got no reply and so I'll ask it again. If a member is banned, we have no idea why, the advice given by a mod is to as them :thumbup: so if a member was banned for breaking the photo rules they say so ... if a member was banned for assault/abuse would they honestly say so?
I don't agree with private parties benig subject to the same stringent rules as socials/munches. As long as a warning is given that a banned member may be attending then it's down to the person wanting to attend to make their minds up surely?? Wrats may have very good relationship with the banned member and surely if they were under and doubt as to their behaviour they wouldn't be risking other peoples safety? (assuming they were banned for something serious and not just a photo transgression).
As much as it is down to the organiser of any event regarding safety .... it's as much down to the individuals attending .. and as wrats have said it's no different than attending a club.
As long as there is a warning and potential attendees can make an informed choice about their attendance it's no one elses business!
Cx
I don't agree with private parties benig subject to the same stringent rules as socials/munches. As long as a warning is given that a banned member may be attending then it's down to the person wanting to attend to make their minds up surely?? Wrats may have very good relationship with the banned member and surely if they were under and doubt as to their behaviour they wouldn't be risking other peoples safety? (assuming they were banned for something serious and not just a photo transgression).
As much as it is down to the organiser of any event regarding safety .... it's as much down to the individuals attending .. and as wrats have said it's no different than attending a club.
As long as there is a warning and potential attendees can make an informed choice about their attendance it's no one elses business!
Cx
Sex God
seems like the thread has run its course and i dont recall a mod adding comment , so any chance you mods/admin could have a read of some of the thoughts on here and perhaps take action if you think its worthwhile?
wrats
wrats
I am not interested in the DPA or any other legal stuff, but what I am interested in is discretion.
This is one of the three big words on here, the others being honesty and "no" means no.
What is this rambling about? Well, as I understand it, I apply to a private party where my attendance would not be known, except by the organiser and the attendees. To me thats discretion, yet people who are not going can demand to see a list where I am named. So my attendance is now known by others not going to the party, so there is no discretion.
Just picking up on one thing that someone said. If a disclaimer is put on the advert for a private party saying "People from other sites or personal friends are attending this party", will this suffice to allow others to decide whether to go or not? Like my TV, if there is something on that I don't like, I'll turn it off. If I turn up at a party where there is someone I do not like/banned/etc......then I would leave. Maybe a wasted journey, but if you really value your safety that much........would you really want to stay?
Do lists have to be submitted for meets or gangbangs on the LMU, where the organiser has had to advertise on two sites? The meets I mean are the adverts saying "Me and my mate". Who is the mate? Do admin get clarification of that person?
I have many more questions that are floating about in my head but I'll watch here and see if they are answered first.
Dave_Notts
This is one of the three big words on here, the others being honesty and "no" means no.
What is this rambling about? Well, as I understand it, I apply to a private party where my attendance would not be known, except by the organiser and the attendees. To me thats discretion, yet people who are not going can demand to see a list where I am named. So my attendance is now known by others not going to the party, so there is no discretion.
Just picking up on one thing that someone said. If a disclaimer is put on the advert for a private party saying "People from other sites or personal friends are attending this party", will this suffice to allow others to decide whether to go or not? Like my TV, if there is something on that I don't like, I'll turn it off. If I turn up at a party where there is someone I do not like/banned/etc......then I would leave. Maybe a wasted journey, but if you really value your safety that much........would you really want to stay?
Do lists have to be submitted for meets or gangbangs on the LMU, where the organiser has had to advertise on two sites? The meets I mean are the adverts saying "Me and my mate". Who is the mate? Do admin get clarification of that person?
I have many more questions that are floating about in my head but I'll watch here and see if they are answered first.
Dave_Notts
Quote by Dave__Notts
I am not interested in the DPA or any other legal stuff, but what I am interested in is discretion.
This is one of the three big words on here, the others being honesty and "no" means no.
What is this rambling about? Well, as I understand it, I apply to a private party where my attendance would not be known, except by the organiser and the attendees. To me thats discretion, yet people who are not going can demand to see a list where I am named. So my attendance is now known by others not going to the party, so there is no discretion.
Just picking up on one thing that someone said. If a disclaimer is put on the advert for a private party saying "People from other sites or personal friends are attending this party", will this suffice to allow others to decide whether to go or not? Like my TV, if there is something on that I don't like, I'll turn it off. If I turn up at a party where there is someone I do not like/banned/etc......then I would leave. Maybe a wasted journey, but if you really value your safety that much........would you really want to stay?
Do lists have to be submitted for meets or gangbangs on the LMU, where the organiser has had to advertise on two sites? The meets I mean are the adverts saying "Me and my mate". Who is the mate? Do admin get clarification of that person?
I have many more questions that are floating about in my head but I'll watch here and see if they are answered first.
Dave_Notts
:giggle:
nice one mate.....
too much supposed power in too few hands these days..................selective discrimination...once again... no consistancy....
RWL
Quote by wild rose and the stag
seems like the thread has run its course and i dont recall a mod adding comment , so any chance you mods/admin could have a read of some of the thoughts on here and perhaps take action if you think its worthwhile?
wrats
I think the old adage has come into play :->>>>>>>>>>
"Say nothing and it will go away"
Phredd
I'm slightly confused by the role of this site.
as far as im aware, any event, regardless of the terminology (Social, Munch, Private Party) has no input by the owners and admin of SH, this site is run purely for money, yet no financial input is given by the owners, so why is it that people can be banned for supporting an event where a banned member may be present? Why is it the owners/admin can decide on the guest list?
all this site is, is a portal based on swinging, it has chat facilities, forum facilities, which allows a person to post the details of an event, and ad facilities.
what authority does the site have, to dictate who goes to an event? if a person has a party at their home, the only people allowed there, are people known to the site, and not on a banned list, surely thats the choice of the person whose venue it is, not the decision by those who make the decisions regarding the running of the site?
as far as im aware, any event, regardless of the terminology (Social, Munch, Private Party) has no input by the owners and admin of SH, this site is run purely for money, yet no financial input is given by the owners, so why is it that people can be banned for supporting an event where a banned member may be present? Why is it the owners/admin can decide on the guest list?
all this site is, is a portal based on swinging, it has chat facilities, forum facilities, which allows a person to post the details of an event, and ad facilities.
what authority does the site have, to dictate who goes to an event? if a person has a party at their home, the only people allowed there, are people known to the site, and not on a banned list, surely thats the choice of the person whose venue it is, not the decision by those who make the decisions regarding the running of the site?
Quote by Medic_1
seems like the thread has run its course and i dont recall a mod adding comment , so any chance you mods/admin could have a read of some of the thoughts on here and perhaps take action if you think its worthwhile?
wrats
I think the old adage has come into play :->>>>>>>>>>
"Say nothing and it will go away"
Phredd
I resent that comment. I've been away all weekend and then away for two days for work and come back to find that, because there is no comment from a Mod, we are villified. Behaviour breeds behaviour. I would have gladly made known the views which I hold but after that comment, and others on the same lines, I now chose not to.
Mod
I have also been away for the weekend and working during the day and without internet access for the last 24 hours. I also have a real life, so excuse me if I don't leap up and down to reply!!
On another note, Staggy, specifically, where you 'gave us 24 hours to respond', would that be in response to a PM not sent to a Mod, but to a Mods partner, because, as you said, you couldn't be arsed to find my PM button???? You say jump, we say how high? I don't think so!!
When I have time I'll respond to what this thread is about, but as Staggy brought this up obviously due to a significant personal event, could you PM ME the details so I'm not arguing the wrong cause?
By the way, my PM is at the bottom of any of my million posts if you get stuck on the spelling.
Off to work now.
Mal
On another note, Staggy, specifically, where you 'gave us 24 hours to respond', would that be in response to a PM not sent to a Mod, but to a Mods partner, because, as you said, you couldn't be arsed to find my PM button???? You say jump, we say how high? I don't think so!!
When I have time I'll respond to what this thread is about, but as Staggy brought this up obviously due to a significant personal event, could you PM ME the details so I'm not arguing the wrong cause?
By the way, my PM is at the bottom of any of my million posts if you get stuck on the spelling.
Off to work now.
Mal
Quote by essex34m
I'm slightly confused by the role of this site.
as far as im aware, any event, regardless of the terminology (Social, Munch, Private Party) has no input by the owners and admin of SH, this site is run purely for money, yet no financial input is given by the owners, so why is it that people can be banned for supporting an event where a banned member may be present? Why is it the owners/admin can decide on the guest list?
all this site is, is a portal based on swinging, it has chat facilities, forum facilities, which allows a person to post the details of an event, and ad facilities.
what authority does the site have, to dictate who goes to an event? if a person has a party at their home, the only people allowed there, are people known to the site, and not on a banned list, surely thats the choice of the person whose venue it is, not the decision by those who make the decisions regarding the running of the site?
I think this post clears this misunderstanding up perfectly essex34m.....
Quote by firelizard
Hi there
I have read quickly thru this thread so forgive me if I'm barking up the wrong tree here.
From what I can see, the issue is not (as far as SH is concerned) about whether you have a banned SH member coming to your private party/social, its about you not being allowed to ADVERTISE it on SH if you have and want to have full control/responsibilty for your guest list.
So in a nutshell if you don't want anyone asking about your guestlist in case you have a banned member attending or something similar, then don't advertise it on SH. As far as I can see SH have a responsibilty of sorts to keep their members as safe as reasonably possible which is probably why this discussion is taking place.
Love
FIRE xx
A question here too - what happens when people start advertising socials/parties on behalf of banned members?
For instance an advertisement "Birthday Parteeee on so and so date" - only to find out that the star of the do, the birthday boy/girl is a banned member?
Kinda interested to know peoples views on that
Or even more subtle than that maybe. Banned member wants to hold a social, so asks their mate on here to advertise it for em, under the illusion that they're 'hosting' it with help?
Quote by essex34m
thank you missy
so if an event is advertised in any way shape or form on SH, be it in the forums, via PM's or whispers in the chatrooms, its under the rules of SH, and therefore controlled by SH?
Not controlled - and don't go asking me questions, cos I end up in a whole bunch of knots
s'pecially first thing in the mornings :?You can have whoever you like to parties and socials - but as for the advertising em on here with banned members going.......... :?
What's your view on my scenario above, parties/socials advertised on behalf of banned members - it's happened :?Another question - what do you suggest happens when a member attends a social/party, and then complains to admin/mods/ops that they were made to feel v. uncomfortable all evening due to 'so and so', or even worse 'so and so' was aggressive towards them, who happens to be a banned member??
Whatever SH do it's wrong - I've learned that much :lol2:
Quote by essex34m
thank you missy
so if an event is advertised in any way shape or form on SH, be it in the forums, via PM's or whispers in the chatrooms, its under the rules of SH, and therefore controlled by SH?
Let me know if any part of this post is not clear enough?
http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/swingers-forum/viewtopic/65788.html
Don't mean to sound cross I just don't understand the point being made.
:P
Ok... so now I see it from both sides. :crazy:
People don't want to feel controlled yet people also want to feel that the site will do something should something bad happen at an event advertised on SH, but how can SH do anything if they have zero invovlement?
What if I have a party at my house, advertise it on the LMU and give a list of those attending to the Mods, and everything goes ok. But I arrange a 3some in the LMU, no list needed, and during the fun the woman slaps me – wouldn’t it be my word against the couples? Would there be any recourse? Could/would SH do anything?
Sorry if this seems to muddy the waters - I just wanted to post it while it was relatively clear in my mind.
People don't want to feel controlled yet people also want to feel that the site will do something should something bad happen at an event advertised on SH, but how can SH do anything if they have zero invovlement?
What if I have a party at my house, advertise it on the LMU and give a list of those attending to the Mods, and everything goes ok. But I arrange a 3some in the LMU, no list needed, and during the fun the woman slaps me – wouldn’t it be my word against the couples? Would there be any recourse? Could/would SH do anything?
Sorry if this seems to muddy the waters - I just wanted to post it while it was relatively clear in my mind.
Quote by Kiss
...but I arrange a 3some in the LMU, no list needed, and during the fun the woman slaps me – wouldn’t it be my word against the couples? Would there be any recourse? Could/would SH do anything?
Why would you not call the police and have the person charged with assault?
SH can only try to prevent situations occuring by not allowing the advertising of events to which previously banned members are expected to be in attendance or are waiting in the room downstairs in the same bar or some such other nonsense. If you don't choose to advertise your event here then SH will have no say in it no matter the outcome.
Quote by Jags
...but I arrange a 3some in the LMU, no list needed, and during the fun the woman slaps me – wouldn’t it be my word against the couples? Would there be any recourse? Could/would SH do anything?
Why would you not call the police and have the person charged with assault?
SH can only try to prevent situations occuring by not allowing the advertising of events to which previously banned members are expected to be in attendance or are waiting in the room downstairs in the same bar or some such other nonsense. If you don't choose to advertise your event here then SH will have no say in it no matter the outcome.
Thanks Jags, I think I'm having my usual difficulty of not explaining myself very well.
I understand about SH attempting to prevent future trouble and the motives behind it, I was more thinking along the lines of what is the magic number? When does a gangbang/5some etc become a private party and subject to the rules of providing a guest list?
im very confused about this thread........
having read the " rules" and the reasons behind them, i agree that they could provide some sort of safeguard.....
what i find strange though is the plethora of hypothetical situations that have been suggested....... mostly by people who dont even hold parties........
having read the " rules" and the reasons behind them, i agree that they could provide some sort of safeguard.....
what i find strange though is the plethora of hypothetical situations that have been suggested....... mostly by people who dont even hold parties........
Quote by DeeCee
im very confused about this thread........
having read the " rules" and the reasons behind them, i agree that they could provide some sort of safeguard.....
what i find strange though is the plethora of hypothetical situations that have been suggested....... mostly by people who dont even hold parties........
So using hypothesis as a way to try and understand the rules is wrong?
Also I think anyone attendinga party/social/whatever should understand the rules - not just the person arranging them event.
