Who deleted Markee's thread?

[Weevil]

any left? can i come over?

Yeah, I mean, it's a couple days old at this point but still good. You don't mind nuts or raisins, do you?

 

[Kajira Callista]

Yeah, I mean, it's a couple days old at this point but still good. You don't mind nuts or raisins, do you?

nope.

 

[catalina_francisco]

the other mod should be the first one who steps in .....clarifies precisely why it's not a violation of the rules.

And where did I say I had not spoken to him about it? Difference is I was sure of what I would find...and despite your inability to accept it was not breaking any rules, it was not. As to across the board rules, I agree, but when you cruise the APF (and I do often because I like a lot of people there and have a thread there myself), I have never seen any indication of anyone asking for proof the pics posted by other than the one in the pic, or that there is undeniable evidence it was permitted by the one usually naked or semi naked in the pic. Even today there was a front page thread which was posted by another and the one featured in the pic was not posting on the thread, and was mentioned by the thread starter would not pose for nude/semi-nude pics for the thread starter anymore...as innocent as it may be, that to me sounds more suspicious than this ever did....and all that is being said is 'show us more'!! Just the way the cookie crumbles I guess.....no doubt if Marquis had posted his pic there, it would have been welcomed with open arms and no questions asked, no proof demanded.

Catalina

 

[Weevil]

And where did I say I had not spoken to him about it? Difference is I was sure of what I would find...and despite your inability to accept it was not breaking any rules, it was not.

For all I know you had spoken to him about it. That never interested me. For all I know this supposed "proof" Marquis had he had before he posted the picture(although he said he didn't)

But what you're saying, if I'm hearing you correctly, is that Marquis actually had this girls permission to post her picture here but presented it in a manner in which he did not. As was mentioned, pretending to break the rules, is going to create confusion. This isn't an isolated, uninformed opinion. Other Mods and Laurel, without having this secret, hidden permission either deleted the thread or said that if the thread had appeared on their board, would have deleted it.

The discussion that arose from Marquis' original post wasn't "Does he have permission or not" but was "Does he need it or not". The answer to that is a clear, unwavering yes. If it had been a question of "Does he have her permission or not then it should have been quickly, and publically, cleared up so as to avoid confusion. You or him should have posted "Yeah, he has her permission but they're getting off on pretending he doesn't." and nobody would have made a stink about it. But to the best of my recollection, Marquis' response to the confusion was "She's crazy enough to send it to me, so I can post it here". Which was just fanning the flames.

If letting everyone in on the joke abrogates the pleasure derived from the thread, that's unfortunate but in the interest in avoiding silly drama, it should probably have been done.

As to across the board rules, I agree, but when you cruise the APF (and I do often because I like a lot of people there and have a thread there myself), I have never seen any indication of anyone asking for proof the pics posted by other than the one in the pic, or that there is undeniable evidence it was permitted by the one usually naked or semi naked in the pic.

Because, for the most part, people there are posting pictures of themselves, or claiming to anyway. Proof that it actually is them would almost be impossible to verify to any degree of certainty.

Now, I don't know much about the APF, as I avoid it like the plague but I assume that if anyone ever posted a thread in which they said "Ha ha, look at this crazy chick who sent me her picture." then the exact same stink would go down there. Just like it would on the GB, the GLBT or the How To Forums.

 

[catalina_francisco]

For all I know you had spoken to him about it. That never interested me. For all I know this supposed "proof" Marquis had he had before he posted the picture(although he said he didn't)

But what you're saying, if I'm hearing you correctly, is that Marquis actually had this girls permission to post her picture here but presented it in a manner in which he did not. As was mentioned, pretending to break the rules, is going to create confusion. This isn't an isolated, uninformed opinion. Other Mods and Laurel, without having this secret, hidden permission either deleted the thread or said that if the thread had appeared on their board, would have deleted it.

The discussion that arose from Marquis' original post wasn't "Does he have permission or not" but was "Does he need it or not". The answer to that is a clear, unwavering yes. If it had been a question of "Does he have her permission or not then it should have been quickly, and publically, cleared up so as to avoid confusion. You or him should have posted "Yeah, he has her permission but they're getting off on pretending he doesn't." and nobody would have made a stink about it. But to the best of my recollection, Marquis' response to the confusion was "She's crazy enough to send it to me, so I can post it here". Which was just fanning the flames.

If letting everyone in on the joke abrogates the pleasure derived from the thread, that's unfortunate but in the interest in avoiding silly drama, it should probably have been done.



Because, for the most part, people there are posting pictures of themselves, or claiming to anyway. Proof that it actually is them would almost be impossible to verify to any degree of certainty.

Now, I don't know much about the APF, as I avoid it like the plague but I assume that if anyone ever posted a thread in which they said "Ha ha, look at this crazy chick who sent me her picture." then the exact same stink would go down there. Just like it would on the GB, the GLBT or the How To Forums.

Finding out about permission and the circumstances only required one question...and communication...something I would expect on a site which has free speech banners all over it.

As to the APF....if you visit it you will see many threads openly say they are of girlfriends, wives, husbands, boyfriends, friends.....not the poster...and as I and others said, we have yet to see anyone question any of them. As to the proof issue, if you support your claim you believe in across the board rules being adhered to, why do you think it okay to not ask for proof there, and not see it as possible to provide (especially as many have never posted before so are not known by anyone)....so I guess you are saying let's not bother?....and yet you see it as necessary for Marquis to provide proof (on a board where he has a history, is known, and is Moderator), and don't think it should be impossible? Seems a bit hypocritical, double standard, and contradictary. Actually, the proof could be supplied in exactly the same way Marquis supplied his...and it is easy and unquestionable if the person has permission.

Catalina

 

[Weevil]

Finding out about permission and the circumstances only required one question...and communication...something I would expect on a site which has free speech banners all over it.

Because of the very volatile subject matter, I don't think most people are going to react, intially, by wondering whether or not that permission was actually had and this was some weird power trip. Once someone did begin to make a stink about it, it should have been resolved publically[/i]. By not doing so, you were essentially encouraging the confusion and terse discussion that led to the thread being intially deleted.

BDSM or not, clearing it up publically would have been easy. Like I said, if the pleasure derived from posting the pic would have been lessened by posting something quickly about this being a game of sorts then it's unfortunate but being as this game was one in which a mod was appearing to break one of the more important rules here at Lit it probably should have been done. If only in the interest of nipping the controversy in the bud.

As to the APF....if you visit it you will see many threads openly say they are of girlfriends, wives, husbands, boyfriends, friends.....not the poster...and as I and others said, we have yet to see anyone question any of them. As to the proof issue, if you support your claim you believe in across the board rules being adhered to, why do you think it okay to not ask for proof there, and not see it as possible to provide (especially as many have never posted before so are not known by anyone)....so I guess you are saying let's not bother?....and yet you see it as necessary for Marquis to provide proof (on a board where he has a history, is known, and is Moderator), and don't think it should be impossible? Seems a bit hypocritical, double standard, and contradictary. Actually, the proof could be supplied in exactly the same way Marquis supplied his...and it is easy and unquestionable if the person has permission.

First and foremost, let's distinguish what I think(Weevil) and what my opinion of how the board should be conducted for the enjoyment of us all. I don't remember if I commented on the controversy. I don't think I did. In general, if you were to ask me about the whole posting of personal info thing, I'd say that the reason I keep so much of my personal info private is because I know that if it gets out there, to anyone, it might be made more public than you want. I think that's a risk you take. If I did comment about it it was probably short and uninterested, along the lines of "Yeah, he shouldn't have done that" and then I went back to talking about movies or sports or whatever and I reacted only in this extremely subdued manner because it was brought to my attention.

Honestly? I don't care all that much about what he did. And if you ask me about another thing I don't care much about, the posting of other peoples pictures in the Am Pic forum, I'd react exactly the same way. I don't think people should post pics of people who aren't themselves without making it very clear and proven that they have said person's permission. Again, it's not something I care much about.

What interested me about this, and why I'm talking to you about this now, was the controversy that erupted around it and the way people here reacted incredulously to it. When people started raising a fuss, one of you should have cleared it up publically. That's all. You could have done it in a new different thread so as not to step on the toes of the people who were enjoying the humiliation and it would have avoided all the drama. The fact that he continued, in my mind, to fan the flames, is what I think the real misdeed was.

 

[catalina_francisco]

When people started raising a fuss, one of you should have cleared it up publically. That's all. You could have done it in a new different thread so as not to step on the toes of the people who were enjoying the humiliation and it would have avoided all the drama. The fact that he continued, in my mind, to fan the flames, is what I think the real misdeed was.

As to what you did or didn't say at the time...I haven't bothered trying to remember if I saw a posting by you or anyone at the time...I am quoting your posts as I address them individually.

As to clearing it up....we did and have...and from the word go were both working on it publicly and behind the scenes. Fanning flames? I think that was done by a lot of posters, some who have never posted here before this (and some who continue to even now the proof is in the hands of those who requested it and as requested to allow the thread to be restarted), not Marquis or I. So despite it passing by the Lit powers that be and their specified requirements in this individual episode, people still want to argue the point? Enough already.

Catalina

 

[Weevil]

As to what you did or didn't say at the time...I haven't bothered trying to remember if I saw a posting by you or anyone at the time...I am quoting what I am referring to in regards to your posts when I answer them indivuidually.

It seemed as though you were accusing me, in your last post of having views on this issue and views on the Am Pics thing that were hypocritical, or more accurately, inconsistent. That despite me never saying one word about the Am Pic forum outside of the fact that I don't go there and, as such, have no opinions on what transpires within.

As to clearing it up....we did and have...and from the word go were both working on it publicly and behind the scenes. Fanning flames? I think that was done by a lot of posters, some who have never posted here before this (and some who continue to even now the proof is in the hands of those who requested it and as requested to allow the thread to be restarted), not Marquis or I. So despite it passing by the Lit powers that be and their specified requirements in this individual episode, people still want to argue the point? Enough already.

If that's a shot at me, understand what I'm referring to is the way he, and by extension you, acted before the whole "Laurel deletes it then undeletes it" thing. I personally think the two of you acted improperly then and, I think, most people would agree with me. Two mods, giving the impression that breaking the rules is okay, is something that shouldn't be done. Even if it is only "pretend".

By not clearing it up when the controversy was emerging you essentially let it balloon into what it became. That's all.

 

[Killishandra]

For all I know you had spoken to him about it. That never interested me. For all I know this supposed "proof" Marquis had he had before he posted the picture(although he said he didn't)

But what you're saying, if I'm hearing you correctly, is that Marquis actually had this girls permission to post her picture here but presented it in a manner in which he did not.

I don't recall Him saying in the original post that He either did or did not have permission. Even I, His own sub, did not know if He did or not. (We are 5,000 miles away again at the moment, and there is a huge time difference... I sometimes wake up when He's going to bed and vice-versa. He'd been telling me about this girl and their conversations, but only mentioned to me briefly that He was going to post her pic on lit.)

bg23 only assumed that He did not have her permission. Then she started a thread in the GB to talk about and bash His thread, and riot ensued.

The discussion that arose from Marquis' original post wasn't "Does he have permission or not" but was "Does he need it or not". The answer to that is a clear, unwavering yes. If it had been a question of "Does he have her permission or not then it should have been quickly, and publically, cleared up so as to avoid confusion. You or him should have posted "Yeah, he has her permission but they're getting off on pretending he doesn't." and nobody would have made a stink about it. But to the best of my recollection, Marquis' response to the confusion was "She's crazy enough to send it to me, so I can post it here". Which was just fanning the flames.

Once He woke up and checked the boards, I seem to remember his reply NOT being, in fact, what you just "quoted" but that he did have her permission to show it to others.

It was I who stated my opinion that if someone sends a BDSM pic out into cyberland they should accept responsibility for it. (And the original pic, of her with "Marquis" written by herself across both breasts, could very arguably be labeled as BDSM due to the humiliation factor.)

How ironic that my own opinion differs from my Dom's, and yet I was getting bashed by bg23 and her friends for agreeing with "everything" my Dom does or says. Before they even garnered His opinion to compare it to mine.

If bg and company had simply stated their concerns, and waited for Marquis to reply when he woke up, then all of this commotion could have been avoided.

But in bg's very first post on His old thread she insulted him repeatedly and had the audacity to say she felt sorry or pity for the females under His care.

It is perhaps a character flaw of my own that I can deal pretty well with insults to myself but cannot bear to stand idly by while those I love are put down for no good reason. Not only did she insult my Dom needlessly, she then insulted my sister sub (and yes, me too.)

I responded angrily (and in my opinion, justified) and told her, amongst other things, to save her pity and use it to run her brain cells. Then I told her my opinion (not my Dom's) on the situation, and said He was sleeping 5,000 miles away, I wasn't aware of all that this situation entailed, and He would probably reply in the morning.

At which point, Metrodance came over from bg23's thread and told me to keep my "beak" out of it and she would rattle my cage if she wanted to hear from me. Yes, those silly words are her own.

My point is that a few unkind people set this fiasco into motion by starting off with insults instead of patience. It was, simply, uncalled-for. That is my "beef" with the whole situation, so to say.

I'm going to bed... If you have anything of substance to reply with, I will read it about 8 hours from now.

 

[Weevil]

I don't recall Him saying in the original post that He either did or did not have permission. Even I, His own sub, did not know if He did or not. (We are 5,000 miles away again at the moment, and there is a huge time difference... I sometimes wake up when He's going to bed and vice-versa. He'd been telling me about this girl and their conversations, but only mentioned to me briefly that He was going to post her pic on lit.)

bg23 only assumed that He did not have her permission. Then she started a thread in the GB to talk about and bash His thread, and riot ensued.

Read the GB thread. While I'm sure there are people who are insulting towards you, your boyfriend(I use the word only because I'm not sure of the legal substance of your relationship and I'm uncomfortable using your lingo) and your lifestyle, there are also a lot of fairly well respected posters, some of them mods, saying the thread was a clear violation of the rules we live by here.

Is that opinion one borne of ignorance of all the particulars of the situation? Maybe but I think the manner in which the particulars were deliberately hidden seemed designed to incite said riot.

Once He woke up and checked the boards, I seem to remember his reply NOT being, in fact, what you just "quoted" but that he did have her permission to show it to others.

I'm not sure why you put the word quoted in quotation marks. I don't remember his response in the original thread either, that was quoted from this thread. As in after it had been deleted. What, to my mind, started this whole kerfuffle is that he only had permission to show it to "others" and not specifically to Lit. I'm pretty sure that's what the violation of the rules was.

Now, I haven't spoken to Laurel in a long time and because these rules don't affect me normally, I may not be all that familiar with them. I assumed that you needed pretty explicit permission to post things here if you were going to post things here. I could be wrong on that one.

It was I who stated my opinion that if someone sends a BDSM pic out into cyberland they should accept responsibility for it. (And the original pic, of her with "Marquis" written by herself across both breasts, could very arguably be labeled as BDSM due to the humiliation factor.)

Again, personally, I'm inclined to agree with you. I'm not sure if that's really in keeping with the rules here.

How ironic that my own opinion differs from my Dom's, and yet I was getting bashed by bg23 and her friends for agreeing with "everything" my Dom does or says. Before they even garnered His opinion to compare it to mine.

I'm not going to pretend to know anything about the dom/sub relationship and what you're allowed to do and what he's allowed to do. Furthermore, like all silly internet dramas, I'm sure people on both sides said some nasty things. Like I've said, the actual substance of the whole thing isn't really a concern of mine.

If bg and company had simply stated their concerns, and waited for Marquis to reply when he woke up, then all of this commotion could have been avoided.

But in bg's very first post on His old thread she insulted him repeatedly and had the audacity to say she felt sorry or pity for the females under His care.

It is perhaps a character flaw of my own that I can deal pretty well with insults to myself but cannot bear to stand idly by while those I love are put down for no good reason. Not only did she insult my Dom needlessly, she then insulted my sister sub (and yes, me too.)

I responded angrily (and in my opinion, justified) and told her, amongst other things, to save her pity and use it to run her brain cells. Then I told her my opinion (not my Dom's) on the situation, and said He was sleeping 5,000 miles away, I wasn't aware of all that this situation entailed, and He would probably reply in the morning.

Like I said, she may have acted badly, you may have acted badly. Honestly? There are dozens of threads a day here where two people are calling each other names. Unless I'm doing the name calling, none of it interests me.

What did interest me was what Marquis and Catalina did, how it was handled and, mildly, the whole "Go back to the GB, you GB'ers" thing. The idea that the rules can be broken if it's keeping with the particular mores of the community is one I don't like.

At which point, Metrodance came over from bg23's thread and told me to keep my "beak" out of it and she would rattle my cage if she wanted to hear from me. Yes, those silly words are her own.

My point is that a few unkind people set this fiasco into motion by starting off with insults instead of patience. It was, simply, uncalled-for. That is my "beef" with the whole situation, so to say.

I'm going to bed... If you have anything of substance to reply with, I will read it about 8 hours from now.

Nobody's blameless. When those people reacted the way they did, the mods here should have let it be known that he had explicit permission to post those pictures here. That would have nipped it in the bud. If he didn't, from my understanding of the rules, he shouldn't have posted the picture.

Good night.

 

[Marquis]

I did not explicitly state that I had permission but I did not explicitly state I did not.

I could've been given the benefit of the doubt, but I wasn't.

I could've been given a chance to respond, but I wasn't.

 

[shy slave]

Bluntly...

I am passed caring

Marquis has brought back the chair AV, one of my favs and a great one to perv and drool over.

That I care about

Kili is right, he is one sexy man, but y'know Kili I am sure I saw him first


(Yes I know I am almost old enough to be his mother, but do I care *shrug*)

 

[catalina_francisco]

What did interest me was what Marquis and Catalina did, how it was handled and, mildly, the whole "Go back to the GB, you GB'ers" thing. The idea that the rules can be broken if it's keeping with the particular mores of the community is one I don't like.
.

Really? Would you care to point out where I told anyone to go back to the GB please? And the part about verifying he had permission? Well a concorde could hardly fly as fast as the thread was removed without asking about permission, any communication about the removal or anything else, or allowing a response to verify permission was granted.

As to your keeping on about breaking rules and the need to be fair across the board, it is wearing thin when it has been pointed out countless times to you bu myself and others that first no rule was broken and second that the rules are not applied across the board as in posting pics of people other than the poster and being asked to provide proof, as can be seen in the APF for one place....and your only response keeps going along the lines of 'well I don't know about that because I don't go there so I'll keep making accusations and not check the facts first'.

Catalina

 

[rosco rathbone]

I did not explicitly state that I had permission but I did not explicitly state I did not.

I think you picked the right career, dude.

 

[Marquis]

I think you picked the right career, dude.

 

[babiesmiles]

I think you picked the right career, dude.

exactly my thought

 

[Killishandra]

Kili is right, he is one sexy man, but y'know Kili I am sure I saw him first

That you did!

Lucky for me, I got to FL before you!

Lucky for us both, and seeing as neither of us are in FL at the moment, we can both perv obscenely on the chair avatar.... Yay!

 

[shy slave]

That you did!

Lucky for me, I got to FL before you!

Lucky for us both, and seeing as neither of us are in FL at the moment, we can both perv obscenely on the chair avatar.... Yay!

I knew i liked you.

Back to perving on his av

 

[snowy ciara]

I'd join you ladies in the chair av perving, but tonight I have "perving on Luna" scheduled in...

 

[Weevil]

Really? Would you care to point out where I told anyone to go back to the GB please? And the part about verifying he had permission? Well a concorde could hardly fly as fast as the thread was removed without asking about permission, any communication about the removal or anything else, or allowing a response to verify permission was granted.

Well, I'm not sure if you did or not. It'd be hard for me to point out where you did it, being as the thread was deleted, but even as such I wasn't accusing you of doing that, specifically, but I remember someone did. That's what I was referring to.

And it was my understanding that the original thread was up for quite a while before it was deleted, during which time lots of people posted a lot of inflammatory things. One of the mods should have stepped in and clarified why it wasn't a violation. If neither of you were online in the entire run of the original thread, then I'm wrong. Freely admitted.

As to your keeping on about breaking rules and the need to be fair across the board, it is wearing thin when it has been pointed out countless times to you bu myself and others that first no rule was broken and second that the rules are not applied across the board as in posting pics of people other than the poster and being asked to provide proof, as can be seen in the APF for one place....and your only response keeps going along the lines of 'well I don't know about that because I don't go there so I'll keep making accusations and not check the facts first'.

I'm not sure why "I don't know everything that goes on at Lit" registers with you as some sort of cop-out but I just can't speak to what goes on at the APF, being as I just don't know what goes on there. My extremely disinterested opinion is that it should be the same there. If someone doubts the validity of someone having permission to post certain pics, then that permission should be established. I don't think that's a bad thing wherever it goes on.

Again, all I was saying was that you/Marquis made a mistake with how the thread was handled. That's not all that big a deal. Mistakes get made all the time. No need to get all jumpy about it.

And those are probably my final words on the subject. I have carrot cake recipes to discuss, after all.

 

[TaintedB]

Thank God its you

I have been having sleepness nights worrying about who has a 'stupid troll bin'

Is bytor in there, and is he chained?

Dare i ask for pics of that

LOL, you might be surprised at who's in there. I don't announce 'em all. Bytor is definitely _not_ there. The guy amuses the hell out of me and not only that, I often agree with him!

 

[TaintedB]

Bluntly...

(Yes I know I am almost old enough to be his mother, but do I care *shrug*)

Man, I had you pegged at 23, 25 at the most. You own a "young sounding" keyboard I guess. :/

 

[shy slave]

I'd join you ladies in the chair av perving, but tonight I have "perving on Luna" scheduled in...

Ahhh Luna perving, a favourite past time of mine

Maybe we should have a perv schedule to ensure equal perving on all delectable Litsers

 

[shy slave]

Man, I had you pegged at 23, 25 at the most. You own a "young sounding" keyboard I guess. :/

Its probably the vibes from the teenagers who infiltrate my room and use the keyboard to play games and talk in teen-speak.

U no wot i meen?

 

[Cheyenne]

Cheyenne must be on vacation. She is always the first mega-poster to meddle here.

Huh? I don't generally read the bdsm board at all unless I'm called to it with a post like yours. What's up?