Question:

[shy slave]

Nope, though the person in question is not known to me (well actually probably is but doesn't want me to know)...problem with those who like to respond off the board using an alt.

Catalina

I hope you took it as a compliment.
After all, if they bothered to create an alt and them pm you, that takes both time and effort; something that they did JUST FOR YOU!!!

I would wonder about the gender part though, has being a Domme under F's tutalage caused you to change sex??

 

[catalina_francisco]

I hope you took it as a compliment.
After all, if they bothered to create an alt and them pm you, that takes both time and effort; something that they did JUST FOR YOU!!!

I would wonder about the gender part though, has being a Domme under F's tutalage caused you to change sex??

LOL, hadn't thought of it that way...as to sex change, let me check........nah, everything is just where and how he left it this afternoon though my butt is mighty sore from the piercing fun he decided he wanted to indulge in.

Catalina

 

[A Desert Rose]

Dear Catalina

I, for one believe that this forum would lose it's community feel if we start deleting posts and sanitizing threads.

I, and others can scroll past shit we aren't interested in reading, and do so on a regular basis. I, and others can just not open threads that hold no interest and do so on a regular basis.

I happen to enjoy the feel that this forum has had. I know that many others do, too. I also believe that you've had a lot to do with fostering that atmosphere. It's not just a place to learn and read and grow... it's also a place of entertainment and friendship for many of us. Sanitizing threads will do nothing but create a coldness that, I believe, no one wants here.

And that's all I have to say to you about this. ;D

 

[CharleyH]

How can this forum better accumulate knowledge, insight, and experiences in particular areas?

'threads' is an old idea on the internet, and while they do help a little to keep related discussion together, they have many drawbacks, not the least of which is vast stretches of chatter that any later reader is going to have to skim or skip past.

a thread really is NOT like a library book, and cataloguing threads is great as far as it goes, but helps only a few diligent souls with lots of time and patience.

can threads be better linked up, from their inception?

People talk from where they are in the moment, hence the word..." thread"? I know you will get that.

 

[NemoAlia]

If we linked up threads from their beginnings, wouldn't that just put the help-bunnies out of work? I mean, part of the fun of getting to know each other's online personae is finding out who's made the search function their bitch.

 

[WriterDom]

Forum rules and stickys are monuments to the stupidity of their creators. In an open forum. Now if you want to close it and have 20 select members, change might work.

You want to see a piss fight, pick a Thread Goddess to decide that suzysubbie's post is fluff and have it removed.

 

[alice_underneath]

On the issue of whether or not threads should be condensed before being enshrined in the Library, I'm casting my vote with KC et al.

As a practical matter, I question the utility of such an endeavor.

On a human level, I have to wonder who would be arrogant enough to feel comfortable in the role of Deleter of Irrelevant Posts.

Alice

 

[Pure]

who would

be arrogant enough to think that every



posting of theirs of enduring interest through the ages?

a couple points getting lost here: IF the aim is for the library to contain groups of threads on a topic, then why not eliminate the banter *from the condensed threads* in the library. no one is saying 'no banter' or 'all banter posts are eliminated *as soon as they appear.* nor even, the original form of the thread, with its witty bon mots like will cease to exist (it would still be there in Lit archives, searchable etc.). heck, there could even be a separate library of 'immortal wit and coruscating flirtation at the bdsm forum.'

 

[Kajira Callista]

be arrogant enough to think that every



posting of theirs of enduring interest through the ages?

a couple points getting lost here: IF the aim is for the library to contain groups of threads on a topic, then why not eliminate the banter *from the condensed threads* in the library. no one is saying 'no banter' or 'all banter posts are eliminated *as soon as they appear.* nor even, the original form of the thread, with its witty bon mots like will cease to exist (it would still be there in Lit archives, searchable etc.). heck, there could even be a separate library of 'immortal wit and coruscating flirtation at the bdsm forum.'

i suppose you cant learn from banter...or at least not the banter that includes the froggy with the tongue...


or is it that it annoys you, Pure so we should do away with it?
You need to reread what you are saying darlin'...then maybe reevaluate why you are posting at a site that advocates free speech?

 

[A Desert Rose]

...The librarian would try to make sure that the contributers are either health (or whatever) pros, or are *referencing* their claims. In such a thread, as at Wikipedia, a questionable posting would receive a label-- factuality disputed.

This guy says that s'lara is not only qualified but has the time to establish who is a "health (or whatever) pro." No offense to s'lara, but I'm not so sure I would trust her judgement, anymore than most of YOU would trust mine. And where does she have the time to do all this, anyway?

And Lance... I do so you. LMAO Thanks for posting. ;D

 

[alice_underneath]

who would be arrogant enough to think that every



posting of theirs of enduring interest through the ages?

On an anonymous message board, I'd say that anyone who believes that any of their posts are of "enduring interest through the ages" is operating at a level of self-importance that I find unfathomable.

Jeez, Pure, are you serious with this stuff or just trying to get people going here?

Oops. Sorry about the fluffy and chaffy emoticon.

That one too.

And those!

Actually.....




I'm not sorry at all. I'm just trying to lighten up the conversation by fooling around. So there.

 

[Pure]

may i ask if KC and ADR see any point to a library? is that too an infringement of free speech?

i'm not here to go back and forth, and won't on this. possible improvements to the library are not really a vital item for me.

 

[Kajira Callista]

may i ask if KC and ADR see any point to a library? is that too an infringement of free speech?

i'm not here to go back and forth, and won't on this. possible improvements to the library are not really a vital item for me.

KC likes the library just fine the way it is

 

[Pure]

KC,

but isn't some evil dictator *selecting* threads and taking away your first amendment rights?

didn't some threads with your remarks NOT get selected? and how can that be justified, since it's a free country.

it's all a big plot to silence those who are the backbone, the 'real people' of this country! (and the 'real' bdsm -ers)

 

[evesdream]

pure

It probably depends on what you're using the forum for. If your curiousity is driving you, you'll find the information you need fairly easily; no one seems to have a problem directing each other to old threads or the library. If you're researching for a book or something, and need every bright thing said on a topic the search will no doubt be tiresome, since this forum's default is designed for conversation not quick research. By the way, isn't here a BDSM wikipedia extant? whippipedia or something? Has anyone else seen it or was I dreaming?

PS, how about this, eve. the library contains condensed threads, BUT the whole thread is [also] retained [and available] for those with time to sift through the chitchat, or inclination to study gossip.

Putting flame and fluff posters on temporary "ignore" while reading old threads might work adequately enough too, yeah?

The researcher in me loves the idea of someone else sifting out the information I don't need (no more endless library basement corridors) but I don't see how it could work or be worthwhile here (outside of exisiting search feature...).

hiya,

if an 'old' thread is pulled up and added to, how does that prevent new stuff?

i think profusion of threads, so that easy topics go round and round, ARE a big problem. every few months someone says, 'why not stick the garden hose up my ass?" or 'why not pour a bottle of wine in my sub's butt,' and we go round and round.


in trying to use 'search,' one sometimes gets hundreds of hits.

perhaps the librarian, in choosing a thread, could somehow let the 'search' function know which are the best threads (so those hits are starred) OR make it possible to limit the 'search' to the designated library threads.

---
PS, how about this, eve. the library contains condensed threads, BUT the whole thread is [also] retained [and available] for those with time to sift through the chitchat, or inclination to study gossip.

 

[A Desert Rose]

On an anonymous message board, I'd say that anyone who believes that any of their posts are of "enduring interest through the ages" is operating at a level of self-importance that I find unfathomable.

Jeez, Pure, are you serious with this stuff or just trying to get people going here?

Oops. Sorry about the fluffy and chaffy emoticon.

That one too.

And those!

Actually.....




I'm not sorry at all. I'm just trying to lighten up the conversation by fooling around. So there.

Someone came here to stir up shit and reinvent the wheel... that's all. This guy does it, periodically. It's not new.

 

[Kajira Callista]

KC,

but isn't some evil dictator *selecting* threads and taking away your first amendment rights?

didn't some threads with your remarks NOT get selected? and how can that be justified, since it's a free country.

it's all a big plot to silence those who are the backbone, the 'real people' of this country! (and the 'real' bdsm -ers)

uhmmm Pure....you already know im not gonna play this game with you. Have a good day Sir.

 

[A Desert Rose]

KC likes the library just fine the way it is

Yes, me too, KC. Of course, I didn't start a thread complaining about how things are run in this forum. This mod from elsewhere did that. Then he tries to shift the blame back on you and me???

yea, sure.

 

[jadefirefly]

*Fluff, fluff*

*Flame, flame*

*Excersise rights to free speech*

*Loudly and vehemently excersise rights to free speech*

*Get pissy because someone else is exersising their rights to free speech too*

*Flame*

*Fluff*

*Sulk*

Rinse. Repeat.


There. This is a post which can officially be deleted. But beware -- I might come back and bitch about my lack of free speech right!

Oh, the quandary....

 

[Kajira Callista]

I declare this thread offically hijacked!

 

[graceanne]

I declare this thread offically hijacked!

YAY! I wanna cookie.

 

[Kajira Callista]

YAY! I wanna cookie.

Reese's peanut butter cup cookies.
take your favorite peanut butter cookie recipe but instead of rolling dough into balls and flattening with a fork, skip the flattening.
Bake them the same but when they are done, as soon as you take em out of the oven... press a miniature Reese's in the center of each one. cool thoroughly and buy lotsa milk.

 

[A Desert Rose]

Reese's peanut butter cup cookies.
take your favorite peanut butter cookie recipe but instead of rolling dough into balls and flattening with a fork, skip the flattening.
Bake them the same but when they are done, as soon as you take em out of the oven... press a miniature Reese's in the center of each one. cool thoroughly and buy lotsa milk.

ABSOFUCKINGLUTELY! the only kind to eat.

 

[graceanne]

ABSOFUCKINGLUTELY! the only kind to eat.

I think I'm getting fat just from the thought of those cookies. *sigh*

 

[Pure]

yum,

there's an idea, cookie recipes in every thread.

bake me a batch!