This topic is now full - if you want to reply, please make a new post on the board itself.
This post is on the Pro-Mistresses etc web board.
| 10 Jun 08, 8:15 PM Admin UK, 14 yrs  |
Would it help if we GOAB'd and locked the multiple "why does it cost so much?" threads so only one was active at a time? We're not going to suppress discussion along those lines, just as we're not going to suppress the "but the sub has all the power!" threads on UK D/s Relationships, but there's no need for multiple threads along the same lines. However, this would be conditional on people not flooding threads to fill them up and suppress them, as happened recently. Regards, Admin
Remember: it's only a website | |||
| 10 Jun 08, 9:14 PM Jahc01 3 yrs £ |
There has been a lot of e mail flying around, people trying to figure out how we can keep discussions on course, and make this valuable part of site site work well. Because it is appreciated, believe me. It is infuriating when sock puppets and trolls pop up with the single intention of annoying people and de-railing threads. Not to respond feels like surrendering the board to them, but responding also encourages them, it's a dilemna there has been much collective head scratching about. I seem to be lucky in that I don't suffer the annoyance of no-show clients, but their Ladyships get it lots and this arsehattery is just the online equivalent. Well mannered questions, whether profound or naive, get well mannered and careful answers - that has never been a problem. It's those deliberately stirring the brown stuff that are. The conclusion from the e mail flurry is that the best strategy is not to rise to the bait, but to use humour - not spiteful sarcasm, but genuine humour. I really hope it works. I don't s'pose you'd let STA moderate this bit? That could be a gas!
| |||
| 11 Jun 08, 12:01 AM x_Red_x 6 yrs |
Perhaps those threads that seek to deliberately troll could be classed with the YKINOK type threads and deleted or locked accordingly? As Jahc says, a reasoned question, asked properly, will get a reasoned response. But the offensive nature of some of the posts tends to just result in an offensive reply. Red | |||
| 11 Jun 08, 1:07 AM Admin UK, 14 yrs |
Do you have some examples of specific posts that are YKINOK? ie saying it's not ok to go to pro-tops / pro-bottoms, rather than starting threads claiming, for instance, that the pro business is not what it claims. As above, just as we don't lock threads that say D/s is really all controlled by the sub, we don't want to lock threads here just for saying, even in an abrasive way, that it's really all controlled by the client. Do you see that distinction, and the parallel it has in other parts of BDSM? Regards, Admin Remember: it's only a website Edited 11 Jun 08, 1:12 AM by Admin | |||
| 11 Jun 08, 1:13 AM Lady_Anna_Bradford UK(BD), 5 yrs   |
How about threads that knock us for being Pros? How would those be classed? Some trolls are practically accusing us of extortion.
"If no sexual offence is being committed it seems very odd indeed that there should be an offence for having an image of something which was not an offence," Lord Wallace of Tankerness | |||
| 11 Jun 08, 1:25 AM Admin UK, 14 yrs |
Are they knocking you for being pros or for how you present your services?
This would be a lot easier with a specific worst-case post to discuss Regards, Admin Remember: it's only a website | |||
| 11 Jun 08, 9:35 AM Ms_Tytania 6 yrs |
Both. They knock pros for being pros and they also knock them for how they present their services. A good discussion in itself, the latter; the problem is when it's assumed that pros, by definition, present themselves and their services with dishonesty. That would be a case of YKINOK (did I spell that right?)
Oh, one will crop up sooner rather than later. They appear fairly regularly, I'm sure I don't need to tell you this.
Cultivate your inner whore | |||
| 11 Jun 08, 12:16 PM Admin UK, 14 yrs |
Then it should be possible to look back through the previous threads and point to one that we can discuss. That's a serious request and offer. Regards, Admin
Remember: it's only a website | |||
| 11 Jun 08, 1:32 PM Lady_Anna_Bradford UK(BD), 5 yrs |
This is a recent one. http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/boards/mistress... This is a classic example of trolling with inflammatory bias and accusation, rather than an attempt to start a civilised discussion about professional domination.
"If no sexual offence is being committed it seems very odd indeed that there should be an offence for having an image of something which was not an offence," Lord Wallace of Tankerness | |||
| 11 Jun 08, 1:38 PM x_Red_x 6 yrs |
Trust me, it's being taken in that vein. Although it would be easier if it didn't keep coming up server error... Red |
