Posted by JudyInDsGuise on Mon 21 Dec 09, 4:49 PM to JudyInDsGuise's blog.
You seem to have set the posts to "hidden" before even reading them now, so in the interests of transparency I've reposted here.
I'm not so sure that anyone promoting "safety" should be hiding things that they don't agree with if they are on-topic - I'd certainly have trouble taking their interest in my safety seriously.
judy
I'm sure you meant to include Jahc99's off topic post in this too My original post was on topic, but apparently too difficult to address politely or correctly. As you (@Minimum_Risk) were the OP, maybe you could address the on-topic issues I raised?
Many thanks ETA: @Jahc99's post, which stated I'd asserted something I didn't say, breaks the AUP of this site. As the blog owner, it's your responsibility to deal with this or you're in breach of the AUP too... judy |
| 21 Dec 09, 4:50 PM MissP UK(EN), 8 yrs  |
I just replied to that too, and found my post hidden. Ergo: This is a really thorny one. If someone follows your advice, and then a disaster happens, it's more than possible the the police or a court may come knocking on your door, as you're the bloke on the internetty who told him (or her!) how to do it! I personally wouldn't want that responsibility. On the demo side - I've seen some effing awful, as excruciatingly badly done demos. Who's doing the selection and vetoing?
I appreciate you're trying to do a "good thing", but when a great deal of it potentially involves illegal practices, I'm not at all sure about it all | ||
| 21 Dec 09, 5:08 PM Stallen 6 yrs |
Me thinks the loonies are now in charge of their own asylums? Think of the fierce energy concentrated in an acorn! You bury it in the ground, and it explodes into a giant oak! Bury a sheep, and nothing happens but decay!" —George Bernard Shaw | ||
| 21 Dec 09, 5:16 PM Minimum_Risk 2 yrs |
Now made visible and replied to. Initially all comments were visible, but Judy's interventions simply prove that to keep the thing on topic, it is necessary to have comments initially hiden - I do not want squabbles like that to get in the way of the main business of the group.. If she doesn't like it, she can start her own group. Edited 21 Dec 09, 5:24 PM by Minimum_Risk | ||
| 21 Dec 09, 5:25 PM JudyInDsGuise UK(E), 9 yrs |
I started my own blog ::points to the screen you're replying on:: Of course, you could have just addressed the on-topic issues/questions (or, whilst posting as @Jahc99, not made stuff up to suit your own agenda). For me, part of "safety" is communication - if an "expert" in rope (for example) does something that works for the vast majority of the ropees safely but it puts me in danger because I haven't communicated something, it's not his/her fault. By the same token, someone saying "la la la I can't hear you" because they don't like the concerns I've raised is wholly at fault if I am unable to stop them other than by expressing those concerns. judy I must be only one in a million (© David Bowie) | ||
| 21 Dec 09, 5:34 PM Jahc99 UK, 5 yrs |
I absolutely agree that communication is essential, and that bottoms have responsibilities too - that is a major part of the plan! I have no doubt that that will feature large in every article. As the OP of Min_R says, it's very much a people thing. Why poison your liver when I could eat it for you? Edited 21 Dec 09, 5:36 PM by Jahc99 | ||
| 21 Dec 09, 5:43 PM JudyInDsGuise UK(E), 9 yrs |
The point is, communication can be just as important if you don't agree with what's being communicated as it is when you do agree, in which case it's not a people thing at all; it's a fact (irrelevant of who the person is) thing. judy
I must be only one in a million (© David Bowie) | ||
| 21 Dec 09, 7:00 PM relaxed1 UK(BR), 6 yrs  |
Whilst applauding the intent behind the minimum risk idea, I have to agree that it's impossible to moderate such a venture without appearing to stifle valid discussion. There is, IMHO, no such thing as a universally acknowledged 'expert' in any walk of life. There might be specialists, but they are all subject to criticism because, being human, they are flawed. Anyone holding him/herself up as an expert is sticking their head above the parapet and inviting others to shoot. In the broad church that is BDSM, what one person considers SSC or RACK (which are only two 'standards' on which there is no commonality of acceptance) another will consider to be absurdly restrictive. It would be truly regrettable if a well-intentioned idea was stifled in the cradle for lack of agreement on its basic modus operandi. "We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking up at the stars" | ||
| 22 Dec 09, 8:38 AM Caracal UK(SS), 5 yrs      |
See below for a good place to start. There is already a central repository for information on this site which can be updated by anyone who feels that they have something to input. It provides an instantly accessible one stop place without the need to trawl through threads or relying on someone to be ever present at their computer to permit the viewing of information proffered by others. Examples:- This facility doesn't seem to be used much, perhaps Admin could move it higher up the page to give it greater prominence. There is still a place for the questions that crop up but any general do's and don'ts should surely be held in the central dictionary. http://www.avaaz.org/en/ Edited 22 Dec 09, 8:40 AM by Caracal |
