Is there a place here for warning others? (92)

How very dare you! My fur's all natural, I'll have you know, matey.

Cookie Monster In Bondage!

Looks like you were trying for "Arctic Fox" and had a nasty accident Incidentally the fur of the vermine turns white in winter

Power corrupts; absolute power is even more fun
Two roads diverged in a wood and I, I took the one less traveled by. Bastard Satnav!

I find this kind of thing ridiculous unless you exposing someone who has been convicted of something that would be classed as dangerous and factual not hearsay and you can prove it

otherwise the situation is this:

first just because this is the internet a lot of people seem to talk as if its full of predators, dodgy people and demons/hobgoblins just waiting to eat you up

REALITY CHECK:

this is just ANOTHER FORMAT FOR PEOPLE TO EXPRESS WHAT THEY WOULD DO IN ANY OTHER FORMAT

you will meet just as many freaks, liars and cretins at burger king, your grans sunday tea get together and tesco

yes lots of hobgoblins but NOT exclusive to the internet, its EXACTLY the same potential as any other social interaction point

EXCEPT THE PLUS POINT IS YOU GET TO SCREEN THE FUCKERS HERE FIRST! so in a way a good thing

as for 'networks' do you really think that makes a difference?

ofen assualt/rape victims are attacked my people they have know for years

so vouchings not really much help especially as most people have the perception of mr fucking magoo!

Now apart from that WHY are you going to so much trouble to 'expose' them??? sounds like sour grapes to me and makes me think you are infact more unstable emotionaly than them

I KNOW OF SEVERAL complete fucking liars on here who post to all you gullible forumites but really do I give a fuck about exposing them? what a waste of energy, I think you are fuelled by vindictiveness, thats fine sometimes if warranted and in a certain way but to do a public song and dance on here especially is a bit ghey ;P

then we also have the issue of 'who the hell are you?'

WE ONLY HAVE YOUR SAY SO AND FOR ANYONE KNOWS YOU COULD BE FRED MOTHERPLUCKING WEST!!!!!! you have no photo , *giggles* no network and a very dubious attitude

Id be more inclined to believe the pied piper if I was roland rat

gossip, gossip, gossip, hearsay, gossip

is this eastenders?

PAULIIIIIIIIIIIINE!!!

"I like to play with things a while. Before annihilation...."

Edited 14 Jan 10, 5:50 PM by ChairmanOfTheBored

Network lists are like bling; some people love them and have huge numbers, some are not joiners-in and have none. Anyone should be able to provide some kind of substantiation for what they claim to be ; if the 'applicant' doesn't make basic checks, to some extent they only have themselves to blame.

Dangerous behaviour by anyone patently certifiable may be an occupational hazard for the ground in which our interests lie . Otherwise, posting a note saying "Ask me privately about chain-saw weirdo in the East Cheam area" is a possible avenue for a public service type warning.

Fitz.

Escaped from the parallel universe

That would probably account for at least 90% of the people on this site....

~* Raku wa ku no tané; ku wa raku no tané. *~

Friends Reunited had a classic libel case, thats one famous one to look up.

But usually it's upto to Admins of sites to take down anything potentially libellous if they're requested to do so, otherwise it looks bad if solicitors do get involved

The first rule of Brat Club, we don't talk about Brat Club...

I looked it up and Friends Reunited weren't the defendants, it was only the person who posted the remark. As Admin appears to remove libelous postings as soon as informed about them it would be highly unlikely for any case against IC to succeed or even get as far as court.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/02/18/exteache...

Science, the only religion that works even if you don't believe in it.
Women wanted, preferably with their own Rohypnol.

As we're picking teams to see how high up the wall we can piss, I'm with Masters_Delight here. There is already too much bellyaching from people who stuck their necks out and got their fingers burned, as it were.

The problem IMO is that there is almost guaranteed to be a mismatch between the perception of Dom(me) and sub in practically any relationship. To have one person giving their perception of it all is grossly unjust (whatever the real facts may be).

This site is for people who are Informed. If you're not Informed then go play with the fantasists on alt.com or collarme.

Sorry to sound harsh but it's my job: I'm a sadist.

There is more than one way to skin a cat but there is only one try per cat

It's only a weblog

So basically he's a charmer and a player who said you were the only one (and didn't tick the poly box).

I can understand you're hurt at being taken in and deceived, but I think you'd have to warn people about half the profiles on most 'nilla dating sites (and FB) if that were the criteria. Unless he's married to more than one he appears to be committing no crime. At least he can be making no pretence of monogamy on a dogging site.

And as you found out, some women really won't care he's seeing other women as they're probably seeing other guys too.

I wouldn't cheat and wouldn't like it done to me, if you're not going to be monogamous be honest about it, but that's internet dating for you.

Of course you can't name and shame, nor should you make unsubstantiated claims about another's behaviour.

However it occurs to me that if a publicly available profile which you think may be of interest to other members appears on another site (woof,woof) I can't see a reason you shouldn't write a weblog with a link to it, something like "Ladies, have you seen this?" perhaps.

Edited 15 Jan 10, 4:33 AM by Trussedworthy