FabSwingers.com > Forums > Fabswingers.com site feedback > Social Meets as an Interest
Social Meets as an Interest
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
We think it would be useful if 'Social Meets' was a tick option on the Profile Interests section.
There are many swingers who like to meet socially, and indeed some who won't play without first meeting in this way, and we think it would be very helpful if they could search for others who feel the same way. Equally, people who don't like socials could leave the box unticked and thereby indicate that they're not interested..
Anyone agree that it would be useful? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It would in some sense I guess, but when I message people I let them know social first to see if attraction is there, as plenty are different from pictures. I had a meet arranged Friday just gone and instead of messaging me to let me know he wasn't going to meet, he stayed offline. Messaged me on Sunday and it All because I wouldn't guarantee him a fuck and he apparently didn't have time for just a social, even though that's what we'd agreed.
So would this interest as an option work? Who knows. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eekayCouple
over a year ago
Sheffield |
We think that sounds like a good idea.
At the moment, as we are newbie/inexperienced we emphasise the need for a social first in our message.
If there's no click and attraction on a meeting then there's no pressure is there?. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Brilliant idea. X
We've had a cpl of socials which were awesome fun and led to a further meet which was just as good 
Any idea I'm sure the Fab people will look at for adding X I'm sure it would be easy to set up and be beneficial to everyone
Xxx |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I never meet anyone without having a social first and always mention this to any potential meet. No social = No meet.
So a big fat yes from me....and hope admin take note.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ost SockMan
over a year ago
West Wales and Cardiff |
Seems like a fine idea to me.
Social meets are an important part of the Fab experience for me. I've made a couple of really good friends (one of whom I've never played with) and I'm really happy that happened.
Makes sense Fab controllers! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I like this idea, some people need to have expectations carefully managed and this will provide an extra opportunity to do so. It isn't the be all and end all, but then not much is on here, but it does allow people to be upfront.
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Definitely a good idea.
A lot of people (like myself) state social meets first in their profile to help break the ice. It's also a way of keeping active on the site and meeting people you enjoy the company of. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We think it would be useful if 'Social Meets' was a tick option on the Profile Interests section.
There are many swingers who like to meet socially, and indeed some who won't play without first meeting in this way, and we think it would be very helpful if they could search for others who feel the same way. Equally, people who don't like socials could leave the box unticked and thereby indicate that they're not interested..
Anyone agree that it would be useful?"
I think it would be. Like you said a lot of people won't meet without a social and there are some that have no interest at all. Being able to filter these people out would be a good idea x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Sorry to talk out of turn, and thanks for saying hi and leading me here OP, but I'm a bit ambivalent about it.
Firstly it strikes me that its gonna be a tick that everyone, even people who don't like socials, will select. Who wouldn't meet a steaming hot babe purely because she liked to meet first hand whereas you prefer not? Socials, unlike sexual preferences, aren't deal breakers.
Secondly, its become growingly apparent that people have very different ideas of what a social is... so you'd likely need at least three tick boxes...
1) Social social (meet for a cuppa and talk about the latest episode of Downton Abbey)
2) Group social (meet a bunch of swingers down the pub and may get lucky or maybe end up in a bar brawl)
3) Sexy social (meet for a flirtatious drink and some naughty hijinx, with a view to seeing if there's any sexual chemistry between you)
For example, I would half tick check box 1, not tick check box 2, and completely tick check box 3. And this just makes the whole thing complicated.
Far better in my mind to simply assert that you'd like to meet the person/couple you're messaging in one of the first few messages and let it unfold from there.
Just my honest thouhts on the idea  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We think it would be useful if 'Social Meets' was a tick option on the Profile Interests section.
There are many swingers who like to meet socially, and indeed some who won't play without first meeting in this way, and we think it would be very helpful if they could search for others who feel the same way. Equally, people who don't like socials could leave the box unticked and thereby indicate that they're not interested..
Anyone agree that it would be useful?"
This is an excellent idea. 'Make is so'
You can't beat meeting people who also enjoy social meetings where they want to get to know each other a little better. A chance to talk and exchange views about everything and anything, all mixed in with a healthy (but not over the top) dollop of 'salaciousness'. I can live without 'salacious' content as well and still enjoy a social but being me I'm always optimistic.
I would be happy to tick this box if it included me in like minded peoples search criteria. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Top trumps. Great idea, socials are fantastic it gives you a chance to A) make sure their pics are up to date and your not meeting someone 20years older than their pic
B) messaging and a phone call are alright but you can never tell if you like someone until you meet them.
C) For some (including us) the social side is just as important as the fuckery
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Hello All
This looks like a great idea especially for single ladies who are being bombarded by offers/ suggestions/requests and even demands for (short notice sex meets). If people were able to block messages from senders who have not ticked that they agree to 'social meet first' then it should reduce the number of cut 'n' paste pests who don't read profiles.
Good luck with your initiative.
Paul |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
So who on this thread, if any, would have this box unticked?
I remain unconvinced that anyone would leave it unticked... but I'll defer to the only couple I know that might "gloswingers". If they'd use it then perhaps it's a good idea... but I sense this "feature" is really designed to persecute such people and force them into saying they'd do a social merely so people don't exclude them from their searches. In fact the more I think of it, the more it sounds like a bad idea.
I'll drop gloswingers a mail |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So who on this thread, if any, would have this box unticked?
I remain unconvinced that anyone would leave it unticked... but I'll defer to the only couple I know that might "gloswingers". If they'd use it then perhaps it's a good idea... but I sense this "feature" is really designed to persecute such people and force them into saying they'd do a social merely so people don't exclude them from their searches. In fact the more I think of it, the more it sounds like a bad idea.
I'll drop gloswingers a mail"
Sure, there will be some who will tick the box and carry on regardless. The idea is to help filter out the cynical "notches on the bedpost" sex hunters from those who see fabs as an aid to widening their network of people with similar sexual appetites.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So who on this thread, if any, would have this box unticked?
I remain unconvinced that anyone would leave it unticked... but I'll defer to the only couple I know that might "gloswingers". If they'd use it then perhaps it's a good idea... but I sense this "feature" is really designed to persecute such people and force them into saying they'd do a social merely so people don't exclude them from their searches. In fact the more I think of it, the more it sounds like a bad idea.
I'll drop gloswingers a mail
Sure, there will be some who will tick the box and carry on regardless. The idea is to help filter out the cynical "notches on the bedpost" sex hunters from those who see fabs as an aid to widening their network of people with similar sexual appetites."
So why not label it honestly as an "I'm a cynical 'notches on the bedpost' sex hunter" tick box? Kinda like when the US visa waiver form asks you if you're a terrorist. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It's a good idea as it would serve as a great filter for us - to avoid
Based on the forum popularity we would be the only ones not ticking that interest .
Would it be possible to have a tick box for those who meet to play too ?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So who on this thread, if any, would have this box unticked?
I remain unconvinced that anyone would leave it unticked... but I'll defer to the only couple I know that might "gloswingers". If they'd use it then perhaps it's a good idea... but I sense this "feature" is really designed to persecute such people and force them into saying they'd do a social merely so people don't exclude them from their searches. In fact the more I think of it, the more it sounds like a bad idea.
I'll drop gloswingers a mail
Sure, there will be some who will tick the box and carry on regardless. The idea is to help filter out the cynical "notches on the bedpost" sex hunters from those who see fabs as an aid to widening their network of people with similar sexual appetites.
So why not label it honestly as an "I'm a cynical 'notches on the bedpost' sex hunter" tick box? Kinda like when the US visa waiver form asks you if you're a terrorist."
'depends on why each individual joined fabs. It's clear that there is a spectrum rather than distinct groups. Preferring an icebreaker meet doesn't mean no play that meeting. My feeling is that any one who pushes for sex after saying they agree to social first lacks good will, show themselves untrustworthy. How many veris are they going to get? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's a good idea as it would serve as a great filter for us - to avoid
Based on the forum popularity we would be the only ones not ticking that interest .
Would it be possible to have a tick box for those who meet to play too ?
"
As promised... I defer to these guys. Personally, I think it'll ostracise them... but seeing as they're fine with that, who am I to grumble? I'll just have my tick box ticked... just like 99.99% of the rest of Fab will.
I assume that this option will make it clear that it is referring to "socials only" and not merely meeting with the option of playing. It's about meeting with playing off the cards... is that right? If so, what is "playing"? Is it sex or flirtation or anything inbetween? If it's just a social for socials sake i.e. no playing allowed then at least that differentiates it somewhat. But this is likely to change for people from one week to the next, depending upon whether they have the time to pursue such free time escapades |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So who on this thread, if any, would have this box unticked?
I remain unconvinced that anyone would leave it unticked... but I'll defer to the only couple I know that might "gloswingers". If they'd use it then perhaps it's a good idea... but I sense this "feature" is really designed to persecute such people and force them into saying they'd do a social merely so people don't exclude them from their searches. In fact the more I think of it, the more it sounds like a bad idea.
I'll drop gloswingers a mail
Sure, there will be some who will tick the box and carry on regardless. The idea is to help filter out the cynical "notches on the bedpost" sex hunters from those who see fabs as an aid to widening their network of people with similar sexual appetites.
"
Are you suggesting we are cynical ?
And looking only for notches on the bed post ?
How rude  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
not saying that its a bad idea..
though it would mean a lot of free dinners and drinks..with fuck all afterwards...
During my years I've met, had a drink and entertained or stayed with my meets..a very few were not interested sexually..but somehow we managed to have a great nites.
what IS peoples problem with saying no thanks to someones face?...and still having fun?- it is not a failed meet if the person likes you or you like them.
I suppose I'll just continue my way through the site notching up bed posts..despite the fact that hasnt always been the case of the meets..regardless of if it was social or private. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"not saying that its a bad idea..
though it would mean a lot of free dinners and drinks..with fuck all afterwards...
During my years I've met, had a drink and entertained or stayed with my meets..a very few were not interested sexually..but somehow we managed to have a great nites.
what IS peoples problem with saying no thanks to someones face?...and still having fun?- it is not a failed meet if the person likes you or you like them.
I suppose I'll just continue my way through the site notching up bed posts..despite the fact that hasnt always been the case of the meets..regardless of if it was social or private."
And we will happily do the same |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
One of the main reasons we have a social only meet first is because I need to know somebody a bit first with no pressure on me to make a decision. I understand and respect the fact that this isn't the same for everyone so a box to tick would save time for people who like to play on a first meet.
Neither way is better just different. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It's a good idea as it would serve as a great filter for us - to avoid
Based on the forum popularity we would be the only ones not ticking that interest .
Would it be possible to have a tick box for those who meet to play too ?
As promised... I defer to these guys. Personally, I think it'll ostracise them... but seeing as they're fine with that, who am I to grumble? I'll just have my tick box ticked... just like 99.99% of the rest of Fab will.
I assume that this option will make it clear that it is referring to "socials only" and not merely meeting with the option of playing. It's about meeting with playing off the cards... is that right? If so, what is "playing"? Is it sex or flirtation or anything inbetween? If it's just a social for socials sake i.e. no playing allowed then at least that differentiates it somewhat. But this is likely to change for people from one week to the next, depending upon whether they have the time to pursue such free time escapades"
Nothing to stop people altering their profile every day depending on mood and who they are looking for. All we are about us giving people a way of fine tuning their profile so that they attract who they want to and save people outside of their preference from wasting time writing a message |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We think it would be useful if 'Social Meets' was a tick option on the Profile Interests section.
There are many swingers who like to meet socially, and indeed some who won't play without first meeting in this way, and we think it would be very helpful if they could search for others who feel the same way. Equally, people who don't like socials could leave the box unticked and thereby indicate that they're not interested..
Anyone agree that it would be useful?"
. A good idea as some social meets can be better fun than play meets . Lots of things to talk about |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Only speaking for myself but struggling to see a negative.
It would simply be another option.
I've had meets that were agreed to be no more than a social, others to see if there was a connection.
I've had social meets that went a little further and meets that went straight under the duvet.
It's an option and an opportunity. Just because I've ticked a "social meets" box doesn't mean I'm only looking for social meets.
I'm not sure why someone who's looking for sex without a social meet first would be put by someone who has them.
If you find someone who's happy with a social, have a social.
If you want to get straight to the main event you could do that to.
One doesn't exclude the other does it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Can someone just verify what a social meet is?
I understand the concept of a play meet... its a meet where sex might be an option. I take it that a social meet is a meet where play is not an option. So far so good
However, by "social meet" are we talking about a completely vanilla meet? Or are we talking about something more saucy and flirtatious? I've come round to the opinion that the former of these is probably detrimental to swinging as it puts people in the "friends" bracket rather than starting off on the right foot and being sexy together. A social meet should be like a blind date imo... with the possibility of some level of minor naughtiness involved, even if there isn't any play.
I like the idea of there being no pressure to play on a meet... but I don't like the idea of there being pressure to not play... as different people might have different ideas of what "play" means. I don't want someone getting upset with me because I start to talk dirty with them on what they are expecting to be a completely vanilla meet. As you can tell... this one confuses me... sorry  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Only speaking for myself but struggling to see a negative."
1) If it's an "I'm prepared to meet socially first" option then almost everyone will tick it as anything other is utterly unreasonable and will backfire on you, akin to saying "I don't want to look at you, I just want to fuck you", and it is therefore a waste of effort implementing it.
2) People might become upset if you try moving to second base when you had this option checked and they had read that as indicating that you were going to have a totally vanilla meet.
3) Anyone who wants to cynically notch a few more bed posts will tick this option, just as most people check most options apart from those which really are red lines for them, as it maximises their opportunities rather than ostracizing and outing them as cynical bed post notchers. So it won't out the people you're hoping it will.
4) People who simply don't have the time to meet socially at the moment, for whatever reason, and thus uncheck this option, will come across as cynical bed post notchers.
5) Socialising in a vanilla sense is utterly secondary to swinging. Thus, people will only do it when they have the spare time to do it. As this will vary from week to week, people will need to change this option regularly... or just lie.
6) Whilst "rimming" is a clear and distinct action, having a "social" is not. It is so nebullous and different from person to person that we may need several options to address it, such as "vanilla social", "group social", "flirty social" and "open-minded social" for people to really define what they mean by "social meet"
7) The whole problem is better solved simply by asking the person/couple you're interested in if they'd like to meet up for a social within the first few messages you send them. This also gives you something to talk about, seeing what type of social they'd like, where and when, etc.
This last point is where a lot of people fail on Fab and a check box isn't going to fix that. People should be keen to meet and socialise... but they need to pursue that and ask people to do that. Since this exchange is going to take place anyway, the check box is redundant.
It seems like the key reason why this idea has been suggested is so that people can search local swingers and arrange vanilla meets down the boozer or something. One way round this problem is just to advertise in the events section that you're gonna be at a certain pub at a certain time and see if anyone turns up. Another approach is simply to search people's profiles individually, find people you like the sound of, and ask them directly.
I don't think that, in the long run, being available to go for a social will be a defining factor that is worth searching the site with, as most people will have it checked on, regardless of whether they're really available for a social or not. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Can someone just verify what a social meet is?
I understand the concept of a play meet... its a meet where sex might be an option. I take it that a social meet is a meet where play is not an option. So far so good
However, by "social meet" are we talking about a completely vanilla meet? Or are we talking about something more saucy and flirtatious? I've come round to the opinion that the former of these is probably detrimental to swinging as it puts people in the "friends" bracket rather than starting off on the right foot and being sexy together. A social meet should be like a blind date imo... with the possibility of some level of minor naughtiness involved, even if there isn't any play.
I like the idea of there being no pressure to play on a meet... but I don't like the idea of there being pressure to not play... as different people might have different ideas of what "play" means. I don't want someone getting upset with me because I start to talk dirty with them on what they are expecting to be a completely vanilla meet. As you can tell... this one confuses me... sorry "
Great post , and certainly one which demands some answers from all sides .
Here's ours .
A social is by its very definition , a meet where play is not an option . This ensures either party is under no illusion or obligation to do anything sexual , and the social concept is designed to allow people to meet up without pressure to decide if they may like to play at a later date .
In some cases this may mean as soon as straight after the social , others when both parties are free again , assuming there is necessary attraction on all sides .
The important part to remember is that a social should never become a play meet , unless it's mutually agreed and no pressure has been applied .
If one agrees to meet for a social and play may be an option if everyone agrees , that's a different concept than a purely social meet . And this is pretty much what we do . People seem to think we just play with everyone we meet . Far from it , we don't play with well over half the people we meet .
But , and this is the important but for us - every meet we have has the agreed proviso that we are not meeting for a social . We are meeting to play assuming we connect . Sometimes it takes minutes to establish a yes or no , others up to an hour , but we know within these times whether we wish to play . And that's how we roll , and will continue to do it like this for as long as we swing .
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Hmmm Gloswingers I'm most disappointed in you... whatever happened to the "cynical notches on the bedpost" approach? Now I'm even more confused lol 
To me it sounds like the difference between...
"Social meet" - lets meet and if we like each other we might fuck
"Play meet" - lets fuck, if we like each other when we meet
Am I missing something? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Hmmm Gloswingers I'm most disappointed in you... whatever happened to the "cynical notches on the bedpost" approach? Now I'm even more confused lol
To me it sounds like the difference between...
"Social meet" - lets meet and if we like each other we might fuck
"Play meet" - lets fuck, if we like each other when we meet
Am I missing something?"
No , you aren't missing anything at all .
Play meet - we meet and assuming we connect , we fuck .
Social - we don't do them .
If there's no option to fuck with a connection , we don't meet . End of , simple as that .
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Hmmm Gloswingers I'm most disappointed in you... whatever happened to the "cynical notches on the bedpost" approach? Now I'm even more confused lol
To me it sounds like the difference between...
"Social meet" - lets meet and if we like each other we might fuck
"Play meet" - lets fuck, if we like each other when we meet
Am I missing something?
No , you aren't missing anything at all .
Play meet - we meet and assuming we connect , we fuck .
Social - we don't do them .
If there's no option to fuck with a connection , we don't meet . End of , simple as that .
"
So what you're really saying is that a social meet should be defined as...
"Social meet" - lets meet and even if we hit it off we're still not gonna fuck
This makes sense as it distinguishes between the two. Then all that's left is the question of whether this is a vanilla meet or not. Ok we're not gonna fuck but can I see yer fanny?
Ooo delightful... don't worry girls I'm not really that crude... honest |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Can someone just verify what a social meet is?
I understand the concept of a play meet... its a meet where sex might be an option. I take it that a social meet is a meet where play is not an option. So far so good
However, by "social meet" are we talking about a completely vanilla meet? Or are we talking about something more saucy and flirtatious? I've come round to the opinion that the former of these is probably detrimental to swinging as it puts people in the "friends" bracket rather than starting off on the right foot and being sexy together. A social meet should be like a blind date imo... with the possibility of some level of minor naughtiness involved, even if there isn't any play.
I like the idea of there being no pressure to play on a meet... but I don't like the idea of there being pressure to not play... as different people might have different ideas of what "play" means. I don't want someone getting upset with me because I start to talk dirty with them on what they are expecting to be a completely vanilla meet. As you can tell... this one confuses me... sorry "
Interesting question.
I'm liking this thread a lot.
I'd simply say you'd chat to whoever you're meeting and agree up front where you were happy to go. Seems like lots of people have different interpretations, so best to talk about it before you start out.
Again from a personal perspective, I had a meet where we agreed up front it was going to be social, but with an option to play if we both felt comfortable.
So, no pressure to play, no obligation or expectation, no dissapointment.
As you said;
"A social meet should be like a blind date imo... with the possibility of some level of minor naughtiness involved, even if there isn't any play."
I'd agree and simply add that you'd agree you were both on the same page first.
I suspect some people may be economical with the truth behind their intention, I'd hope we'd all be strong enough to say no or walk away if we felt the other person had moved the goalposts.
Again, not speaking for everyone, just my thoughts. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"It's a good idea as it would serve as a great filter for us - to avoid
Based on the forum popularity we would be the only ones not ticking that interest .
Would it be possible to have a tick box for those who meet to play too ?
"
We would probably untick too as we probably don't fall into the definition for most of what a social is.As another poster mentioned there are a few.
One they hadn't thought of was the one we do...we meet up for a drink (social I guess )with a view to playing on the same day, infact normally within a couple of hours so if we ticked the social box people might expect us to do pub/club socials or meet people a week before the play for a social which isn't what we do. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I seen a profile recently saying after the the 3rd or 4th social..then possible play
aye fuckin right
That's more than "conventional " dating isn't it?  "
About the same and would feel like going on a conventional date..ffs next they be expecting sleepovers in a separate bedroom |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
My view of a social meet would be to meet for a drink/coffee without expectation.
Having said that, I'd always shave my legs just in case! 
There's a very good chance that I'd drag said person home (if they are willing of course) and be wicked with them but I'd rather not have guaranteed that was happening before we actually met in person.
It's all about communication. I don't think a tick box that says you're happy to meet socially first needs to be any more complex than just that. Then you can tick it or not. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
As a newbie and just dipping our toe, this option would be lovely.
I like the idea of a play meet and a social meet option. Chemistry would be really important to us. Also We may not be everyone's cup of tea!!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As a newbie and just dipping our toe, this option would be lovely.
I like the idea of a play meet and a social meet option. Chemistry would be really important to us. Also We may not be everyone's cup of tea!!
"
We have always met socially first and state that on our profile. We make it clear to anyone who messages us so they can choose to pass us by with no hard feelings if they don't want to do socials, we know they aren't for everybody. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As a newbie and just dipping our toe, this option would be lovely.
I like the idea of a play meet and a social meet option. Chemistry would be really important to us. Also We may not be everyone's cup of tea!!
We have always met socially first and state that on our profile. We make it clear to anyone who messages us so they can choose to pass us by with no hard feelings if they don't want to do socials, we know they aren't for everybody. "
How about 3 boxes;
Social meet.
Play meet.
Put me down for anything meet.
I'm gonna need a bigger screen..... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As a newbie and just dipping our toe, this option would be lovely.
I like the idea of a play meet and a social meet option. Chemistry would be really important to us. Also We may not be everyone's cup of tea!!
We have always met socially first and state that on our profile. We make it clear to anyone who messages us so they can choose to pass us by with no hard feelings if they don't want to do socials, we know they aren't for everybody.
How about 3 boxes;
Social meet.
Play meet.
Put me down for anything meet.
I'm gonna need a bigger screen..... "
Really there should be two boxes only
Willing to bring cake.
Not willing to bring cake.
It would save us all a lot of time |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I'm beginning to wonder if this whole option should be phrased from the other perspective i.e.
"anonymous sex"
This seems to describe what gloswingers and such people are into... they really don't want to know what you think about the latest episode of downton abbey... they just want to fuck you. It also feels more like a sexual preference or activity. And a more sizeable bunch of people might be into it. By unticking it you show that this is not something you're interested in and that you'd rather get to know people... which infers a social aspect. Whilst a tick box for socials just seems super open to interpretation a check box for "anonymous sex" seems pretty clear.
It also seems more neutral i.e. you wouldn't be stigmatised if you were into anonymous sex. Because of this, it is more likely that cynical bedpost notchers might actually select it, thus inadvertently giving themselves away. Which is exactly what the OP's idea is looking to solve. We can also do a search and uncheck "anonymous sex" if we're not open to that, which I must confess we wouldn't be at this point, and that sounds like it would help us find others who also weren't into that.
Whaddya recon? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Anonymous sex , notches on the bedpost , shagging our way through the site .....
What seems to be forgotten is that we need a connection too . We just don't want to spend hours or days determining that connection .
Sometimes it's just simply visual .
Sometimes it's the scenario .
Sometimes it's the personality .
But always there's that certain something .
After 4 years in the lifestyle we know within 5 minutes if it's there , and since we are happy dogging , doing hotel meets , turning up at someone's house , Infact pretty much any scenario you can imagine , we don't need to spend time getting to know the ins and outs of a playmate .
There is a mindset in place with a social meet , one we don't have .
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I think glos that the nub of this issue is not whether you are open to socials or not, as that's such a lose word that most people would infer it as meaning "would you like to meet people before you fuck them?", which I'd say even you guys need... no the defining question seems to be "are you happy to fuck someone you've only just met?". This, to me, isn't a cynical question about bedpost notching, its about a redline issue that some will be happy with whilst others will not. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Anonymous sex , notches on the bedpost , shagging our way through the site .....
What seems to be forgotten is that we need a connection too . We just don't want to spend hours or days determining that connection .
Sometimes it's just simply visual .
Sometimes it's the scenario .
Sometimes it's the personality .
But always there's that certain something .
After 4 years in the lifestyle we know within 5 minutes if it's there , and since we are happy dogging , doing hotel meets , turning up at someone's house , Infact pretty much any scenario you can imagine , we don't need to spend time getting to know the ins and outs of a playmate .
There is a mindset in place with a social meet , one we don't have .
"
Well I for one respect that and don't agree with the notches on the bedpost thing it's none of anybody else's damn business. If that's what you enjoy go for it and enjoy it doesn't make you any better or worse than anyone else. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As a newbie and just dipping our toe, this option would be lovely.
I like the idea of a play meet and a social meet option. Chemistry would be really important to us. Also We may not be everyone's cup of tea!!
We have always met socially first and state that on our profile. We make it clear to anyone who messages us so they can choose to pass us by with no hard feelings if they don't want to do socials, we know they aren't for everybody.
How about 3 boxes;
Social meet.
Play meet.
Put me down for anything meet.
I'm gonna need a bigger screen.....
Really there should be two boxes only
Willing to bring cake.
Not willing to bring cake.
It would save us all a lot of time "
Someone say cake??????????
Is there a "nom nom nom" emojithingy? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"My view of a social meet would be to meet for a drink/coffee without expectation.
Having said that, I'd always shave my legs just in case!
There's a very good chance that I'd drag said person home (if they are willing of course) and be wicked with them but I'd rather not have guaranteed that was happening before we actually met in person.
It's all about communication. I don't think a tick box that says you're happy to meet socially first needs to be any more complex than just that. Then you can tick it or not. "
I think a box defined as (e.g.): "Willing to have an initial no-pressure, no-expectations, talking meet-up" [or similar but less long-winded !] might be useful. Not everyone has the time or inclination, but it could be a search criterion for those who prefer to start that way. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Well I for one respect that and don't agree with the notches on the bedpost thing it's none of anybody else's damn business. If that's what you enjoy go for it and enjoy it doesn't make you any better or worse than anyone else. "
I just wanted to make it clear that I've been using that phrase ironically as I believe that the whole purpose of the option suggested by the OP is to mark out people who aren't prepared to meet people under a no-pressure environment. Tick if you're happy for a no pressure meet, untick if you want to pressurise people into having sex with you. This quite obviously stigmatises people like gloswingers imo... but they don't seem to mind.
As mentioned earlier, I prefer the more neutral "anonymous sex" or perhaps better still "meet followed by sex" option, as it portrays it more as a positive sexual preference, if they tick it that's just their kink... nothing cynical, and if you untick it that shows that this is not one of the things you get a kick out of or its a current red line for you.
By having a "we like being social" tick box that people like glos are supposed to leave unticked it presents them as antisocial bastards who don't need to even see the people they're fucking. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
We have said many times in here that we don't understand those who are here primarily or solely for the social side of swinging . And there are a fair few who for one reason or another are here for just that .
Over time we have come to terms with it , and these people are quite entitled to do as they wish. It's better for everyone if it's made clear on their profile though .
Would having social as a preference do this , albeit unwittingly though ?
We get meet requests daily from people who say on their profile they like a social meet first . When we say that we don't do socials , they say that's cool , they are happy to meet with the intention of playing if we click .
It's clear that the majority would happily click the preference of social if it was there , I just wonder if it may be misinterpreted ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We have said many times in here that we don't understand those who are here primarily or solely for the social side of swinging . And there are a fair few who for one reason or another are here for just that .
Over time we have come to terms with it , and these people are quite entitled to do as they wish. It's better for everyone if it's made clear on their profile though .
Would having social as a preference do this , albeit unwittingly though ?
We get meet requests daily from people who say on their profile they like a social meet first . When we say that we don't do socials , they say that's cool , they are happy to meet with the intention of playing if we click .
It's clear that the majority would happily click the preference of social if it was there , I just wonder if it may be misinterpreted ?"
Anything and everything is open to misinterpretation on here |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We have said many times in here that we don't understand those who are here primarily or solely for the social side of swinging . And there are a fair few who for one reason or another are here for just that .
Over time we have come to terms with it , and these people are quite entitled to do as they wish. It's better for everyone if it's made clear on their profile though .
Would having social as a preference do this , albeit unwittingly though ?
We get meet requests daily from people who say on their profile they like a social meet first . When we say that we don't do socials , they say that's cool , they are happy to meet with the intention of playing if we click .
It's clear that the majority would happily click the preference of social if it was there , I just wonder if it may be misinterpreted ?
Anything and everything is open to misinterpretation on here "
I don't think that's what you mean....... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We have said many times in here that we don't understand those who are here primarily or solely for the social side of swinging . And there are a fair few who for one reason or another are here for just that .
Over time we have come to terms with it , and these people are quite entitled to do as they wish. It's better for everyone if it's made clear on their profile though .
Would having social as a preference do this , albeit unwittingly though ?
We get meet requests daily from people who say on their profile they like a social meet first . When we say that we don't do socials , they say that's cool , they are happy to meet with the intention of playing if we click .
It's clear that the majority would happily click the preference of social if it was there , I just wonder if it may be misinterpreted ?
Anything and everything is open to misinterpretation on here
I don't think that's what you mean....... "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"
By having a "we like being social" tick box that people like glos are supposed to leave unticked it presents them as antisocial bastards who don't need to even see the people they're fucking.
"
Yes, it has been interpreted that way a lot on the forum for us too...we say we meet for a drink and play the same night if everyone agrees and it is taken for someone mails us asking for me to drop my drawers, we say OK and we are fucking within half hour.
I am not sure why there always has to be one extreme or the other |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
By having a "we like being social" tick box that people like glos are supposed to leave unticked it presents them as antisocial bastards who don't need to even see the people they're fucking.
Yes, it has been interpreted that way a lot on the forum for us too...we say we meet for a drink and play the same night if everyone agrees and it is taken for someone mails us asking for me to drop my drawers, we say OK and we are fucking within half hour.
I am not sure why there always has to be one extreme or the other"
Nor I. It does seem that certain preferences attract extremes of opinion socials, kissing and hair being some.
Nobody has to meet anyone who doesn't fit with their preferences. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
" . . . its become growingly apparent that people have very different ideas of what a social is... so you'd likely need at least three tick boxes...
1) Social social (meet for a cuppa and talk about the latest episode of Downton Abbey)
2) Group social (meet a bunch of swingers down the pub and may get lucky or maybe end up in a bar brawl)
3) Sexy social (meet for a flirtatious drink and some naughty hijinx, with a view to seeing if there's any sexual chemistry between you)
Far better in my mind to simply assert that you'd like to meet the person/couple you're messaging in one of the first few messages and let it unfold from there. "
. . . and there lies the biggest problem, would a simply "click once" button actually fit all needs? Great idea most sensibly put BUT we would rather visitors to our profile read the FULL text and not just the "quick options"?
. . . maybe two buttons. One for "Social meeting required" and the other "Fucks on the first date". |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
How about some feed back from Admin/Moderators that lets us know which features are going to be added and when.
It's all good and well asking site members for feed back but not much point if we don't get any feed back from you.
It can't be that difficult surely. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"How about some feed back from Admin/Moderators that lets us know which features are going to be added and when.
It's all good and well asking site members for feed back but not much point if we don't get any feed back from you.
It can't be that difficult surely."
I'd say it might be that the site works well enough for those who use their noodle.......when the site needs hundreds more 'filters' it only achieves people being more lazy and expectant of their narrowing market. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"How about some feed back from Admin/Moderators that lets us know which features are going to be added and when.
It's all good and well asking site members for feed back but not much point if we don't get any feed back from you.
It can't be that difficult surely."
Mods can't action any site changes, but Admin who are the ones who can read every suggestion. If they are going to do any changes they start a thread when it is live |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
By having a "we like being social" tick box that people like glos are supposed to leave unticked it presents them as antisocial bastards who don't need to even see the people they're fucking.
Yes, it has been interpreted that way a lot on the forum for us too...we say we meet for a drink and play the same night if everyone agrees and it is taken for someone mails us asking for me to drop my drawers, we say OK and we are fucking within half hour.
I am not sure why there always has to be one extreme or the other
Nor I. It does seem that certain preferences attract extremes of opinion socials, kissing and hair being some.
Nobody has to meet anyone who doesn't fit with their preferences. "
This |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Dear Admin, this has become by far the most-posted topic on the feedback forum. Clearly you don't enter into public discussions, but considering the popularity of the idea presented here, and the effort made by so many people, it would be encouraging to see some sort of acknowledgement that you've at least read it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Dear Admin, this has become by far the most-posted topic on the feedback forum. Clearly you don't enter into public discussions, but considering the popularity of the idea presented here, and the effort made by so many people, it would be encouraging to see some sort of acknowledgement that you've at least read it."
At least part of the reason why this thread has had so many posts on it is because it has been contested by those who it would effect. I would urge admin to read one of my own posts earlier that lists the various reasons why the feature shouldn't be put in place. Not least being that it would ostracise and vilify anyone who doesn't have it checked.
Several suggestions have been made which focus on the act of having sex with strangers after a meet as being a positive sexual preference, rather than stigmatising it as being literally anti "social". Something like a "meet and play" option which those who would rather keep meets separate from sex would have unchecked. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
With concern to my previous post, however, I should make it clear that I believe the real "solution" to this "problem" is actually to do nothing. Arranging meets and what format they're going to take is an integral part of communicating with people. It is something unique to each meet. It's not an issue for a check box to try and "fix". |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Dear Admin, this has become by far the most-posted topic on the feedback forum. Clearly you don't enter into public discussions, but considering the popularity of the idea presented here, and the effort made by so many people, it would be encouraging to see some sort of acknowledgement that you've at least read it.
At least part of the reason why this thread has had so many posts on it is because it has been contested by those who it would effect. I would urge admin to read one of my own posts earlier that lists the various reasons why the feature shouldn't be put in place. Not least being that it would ostracise and vilify anyone who doesn't have it checked.
Several suggestions have been made which focus on the act of having sex with strangers after a meet as being a positive sexual preference, rather than stigmatising it as being literally anti "social". Something like a "meet and play" option which those who would rather keep meets separate from sex would have unchecked."
Im not sure why it would ostracise anyone who didnt have it checked and I would probably check the "meet and play" option if there was one but I would still want to see a pic of the person I might meet and play with. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"
At least part of the reason why this thread has had so many posts on it is because it has been contested by those who it would effect. checked.
.
"
To be fair there are a lot more posts in favour of it. I don't think even the people who mentioned they wouldn't use it said they were against it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
At least part of the reason why this thread has had so many posts on it is because it has been contested by those who it would effect. checked.
.
To be fair there are a lot more posts in favour of it. I don't think even the people who mentioned they wouldn't use it said they were against it"
Of corse there are way more posts in favour of it !
As another poster just said , it's more of a social site lol .
The point is that it's easy to establish that you want a social only meet beforehand by talking to a potential meet first .
We always make it clear that we are a meet and play couple .
Simply make it clear you are a social first if that's what you want .
All the interests on here are things you are actually interested in doing on a play meet . So why bring in an interest which has nothing to do with what you like to do when playing ?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"
At least part of the reason why this thread has had so many posts on it is because it has been contested by those who it would effect. checked.
.
To be fair there are a lot more posts in favour of it. I don't think even the people who mentioned they wouldn't use it said they were against it
Of corse there are way more posts in favour of it !
As another poster just said , it's more of a social site lol .
The point is that it's easy to establish that you want a social only meet beforehand by talking to a potential meet first .
We always make it clear that we are a meet and play couple .
Simply make it clear you are a social first if that's what you want .
All the interests on here are things you are actually interested in doing on a play meet . So why bring in an interest which has nothing to do with what you like to do when playing ?
"
You would have to ask all the people who said it was a good idea that question. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Dear Admin, this has become by far the most-posted topic on the feedback forum. Clearly you don't enter into public discussions, but considering the popularity of the idea presented here, and the effort made by so many people, it would be encouraging to see some sort of acknowledgement that you've at least read it.
At least part of the reason why this thread has had so many posts on it is because it has been contested by those who it would effect. I would urge admin to read one of my own posts earlier that lists the various reasons why the feature shouldn't be put in place. Not least being that it would ostracise and vilify anyone who doesn't have it checked.
Several suggestions have been made which focus on the act of having sex with strangers after a meet as being a positive sexual preference, rather than stigmatising it as being literally anti "social". Something like a "meet and play" option which those who would rather keep meets separate from sex would have unchecked."
That's a pretty selfish position. The overwhelming concensus in the thread is "yes".
But because you don't want it it Fab shouldn't enact the option?
Awesome. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
At least part of the reason why this thread has had so many posts on it is because it has been contested by those who it would effect. checked.
.
To be fair there are a lot more posts in favour of it. I don't think even the people who mentioned they wouldn't use it said they were against it"
This.
Actually, this this. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
To those who are still unclear about the problem with this option. The OP has recommended a "Social Meets" check box.
A new member joins. They see they are asked if they would like to tick "Social Meets". They think to themselves "Of course! I want to meet people before I play with them" So they tick it... not having a clue about its real meaning. Now they are browsing the site and they come across some people who have it unticked and they think... "Wow these guys will fuck anyone, even without meeting them... what a bunch of slappers... block"
The solutions have been explored over this thread, if you care to revisit them. This involves rephrasing the option so its clearer... but this reveals that there are lots of different types of socials that it would probably need to cater for. I then addressed the possibility of reversing it so it is an option box for people who don't want to do social only meets. This is a marked improvement... with far less problems and possible confusions arising from it. But my final verdict, as a web developer myself, is that this issue is simply a fundamentally communication based issue that people will want to talk between themselves about and decide on on a case by case basis that a check box really isn't the way to go about things.
As I wrote in one of my first posts, if the OP wants to meet other social swingers in their area why not just put on a social only event or tell everyone you're gonna be down a particular boozer at a particular time. I can't see how that doesn't solve the problem the OP has been looking to address. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
". Now they are browsing the site and they come across some people who have it unticked and they think... "Wow these guys will fuck anyone, even without meeting them... what a bunch of slappers... block"
."
I am sure those of us who meet with the intention of playing ( obviously if you click ) will have a thick enough skin to not be bothered if people block us |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
". Now they are browsing the site and they come across some people who have it unticked and they think... "Wow these guys will fuck anyone, even without meeting them... what a bunch of slappers... block"
I am sure those of us who meet with the intention of playing ( obviously if you click ) will have a thick enough skin to not be bothered if people block us"
Newbies will block you because they think you don't even want to see their faces before you fuck them. They won't understand what "Social Meets" means like you and we do. It won't have been explained to them. So your having not ticked this means that you don't want to meet them at all, not even for 5 minutes, before you fuck them. It'll stigmatise you (and people like you) as "fuck anything" slappers... and virtually no one will want to talk to you. That's what I've been trying to convey. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
I think you are missing my point...we really don't care what other people think of us and as people who want to people for socials before a meet on a later dates don't want to meet us that's fine, as we don't want to meet them either.. so the option if Admin put it on won't affect us at all |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think you are missing my point...we really don't care what other people think of us and as people who want to people for socials before a meet on a later dates don't want to meet us that's fine, as we don't want to meet them either.. so the option if Admin put it on won't affect us at all"
Hmmm. You're not seeing it are you. Let me try and put it this way... if the option box being suggested said "we need to see your face before we play" and admin decided that, because of the way you roll, you should have that option box unchecked... would you still be so nonchalant about the idea?
No of course not... because we all need to see people before we play with them right. Well... by the same token... we also all need to "Meet" people before we play... and the OP has suggested a "Social Meets" option. You and I know what the OP means by that option... but most people on this site won't have a clue.. instead they will literally read the words as indicating that you are willing to meet the people you're gonna play with. Thus, in the end you will have effectively unwittingly unchecked a check box that may as well have read "we need to see your face before we play"
Are you getting what I'm saying? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *airybearCouple
over a year ago
Newcastle Under Lyme |
My tuppence worth, as a newbie.
I got it. I understood what a social meet was when I was a newbie. It is what it says on the tin: meeting socially.
I also think putting too many "interests" like this one will mean less to write about in your profile, and less to discuss in messages. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think you are missing my point...we really don't care what other people think of us and as people who want to people for socials before a meet on a later dates don't want to meet us that's fine, as we don't want to meet them either.. so the option if Admin put it on won't affect us at all
Hmmm. You're not seeing it are you. Let me try and put it this way... if the option box being suggested said "we need to see your face before we play" and admin decided that, because of the way you roll, you should have that option box unchecked... would you still be so nonchalant about the idea?
No of course not... because we all need to see people before we play with them right. Well... by the same token... we also all need to "Meet" people before we play... and the OP has suggested a "Social Meets" option. You and I know what the OP means by that option... but most people on this site won't have a clue.. instead they will literally read the words as indicating that you are willing to meet the people you're gonna play with. Thus, in the end you will have effectively unwittingly unchecked a check box that may as well have read "we need to see your face before we play"
Are you getting what I'm saying?"
Are you getting what the overwhelming number of contributors to this thread are saying? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think you are missing my point...we really don't care what other people think of us and as people who want to people for socials before a meet on a later dates don't want to meet us that's fine, as we don't want to meet them either.. so the option if Admin put it on won't affect us at all
Hmmm. You're not seeing it are you. Let me try and put it this way... if the option box being suggested said "we need to see your face before we play" and admin decided that, because of the way you roll, you should have that option box unchecked... would you still be so nonchalant about the idea?
No of course not... because we all need to see people before we play with them right. Well... by the same token... we also all need to "Meet" people before we play... and the OP has suggested a "Social Meets" option. You and I know what the OP means by that option... but most people on this site won't have a clue.. instead they will literally read the words as indicating that you are willing to meet the people you're gonna play with. Thus, in the end you will have effectively unwittingly unchecked a check box that may as well have read "we need to see your face before we play"
Are you getting what I'm saying?"
Exactly ....
We are meet and play , but if there's no attraction we don't play .
People don't always look like their pics .
Sometimes there's no connection .
Sometimes they are not shower clean .
There are a variety of reasons why we wouldn't play if it didn't feel right .
So although we wouldn't have social as an interest , we wouldn't guarantee meet and play .
So as we said , it's a totally unnecessary option as if even we ticked it - that would mean 100% of the site would tick it too !!!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think you are missing my point...we really don't care what other people think of us and as people who want to people for socials before a meet on a later dates don't want to meet us that's fine, as we don't want to meet them either.. so the option if Admin put it on won't affect us at all
Hmmm. You're not seeing it are you. Let me try and put it this way... if the option box being suggested said "we need to see your face before we play" and admin decided that, because of the way you roll, you should have that option box unchecked... would you still be so nonchalant about the idea?
No of course not... because we all need to see people before we play with them right. Well... by the same token... we also all need to "Meet" people before we play... and the OP has suggested a "Social Meets" option. You and I know what the OP means by that option... but most people on this site won't have a clue.. instead they will literally read the words as indicating that you are willing to meet the people you're gonna play with. Thus, in the end you will have effectively unwittingly unchecked a check box that may as well have read "we need to see your face before we play"
Are you getting what I'm saying?
Are you getting what the overwhelming number of contributors to this thread are saying?"
But. As I just said , we would feel compelled to tick it too .
And this is just to make it clear that we don't just shag anything .
Thereby making it meaningless ...... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
How did a 'happy to do a social meet' button turn into an 'I'll shag anything button'???
Surely it's just an added interest... i.e. you're not opposed to hanging out with fellow swingers in your social time? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
How did a 'happy to do a social meet' button turn into an 'I'll shag anything button'???
Surely it's just an added interest... i.e. you're not opposed to hanging out with fellow swingers in your social time? "
Everyone is "happy to do a social meet"... its just that, for some, the idea includes the possibility of moving straight onto sex, whilst for others it doesn't.
Socials are socials because you never really know what's gonna come from em. You may have agreed before hand that it'd be a very cautious meet in a cafe, and end up stripping each others clothes off in the bogs. Equally, you may have played up that you're a meet and fuck type person... only to meet them, find them distinctively unattractive, and yet still feel like having a pint with them and watching the footie.
In the end the OP's idea is really a feature intended only for forumites. It's an idea that requires some understanding of what a "social" is, which I learnt by looking on the forums... and it's an idea that would be lost on the vast majority of members who aren't into socialising on the forums and would therefore assume it was an "I want to meet you before I fuck you" check box. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
How do you know what the vast majority of non forum users would assume?  Surely you can only speak for your own assumptions?
I'm sure there are lots of people who do things differently. If there were a tick box on a profile which said 'social meets' I would assume no more than this person is happy meet in a public place, i.e. a boozer/cafe for a drink rather than assume they wanted a chum to the cinema for a night out. If they haven't checked that box then I know they do things differently to me.
You go dogging... you generally don't meet socially beforehand yet I'm pretty sure all doggers don't shag just anyone cause they happen to be there. There needs to be mutual attraction for most people. Do they not tick the dogging box cause people assume they'll shag anyone?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"How do you know what the vast majority of non forum users would assume? Surely you can only speak for your own assumptions?
I'm sure there are lots of people who do things differently. If there were a tick box on a profile which said 'social meets' I would assume no more than this person is happy meet in a public place, i.e. a boozer/cafe for a drink rather than assume they wanted a chum to the cinema for a night out. If they haven't checked that box then I know they do things differently to me.
You go dogging... you generally don't meet socially beforehand yet I'm pretty sure all doggers don't shag just anyone cause they happen to be there. There needs to be mutual attraction for most people. Do they not tick the dogging box cause people assume they'll shag anyone?
"
The dogging analogy is a great one.
We have that ticked but won't shag anyone ....age/ cleanliness / attraction are all required before we will - including dogging .
Perhaps we should un tick that box in case people think we will ..... ???? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"I think you are missing my point...we really don't care what other people think of us and as people who want to people for socials before a meet on a later dates don't want to meet us that's fine, as we don't want to meet them either.. so the option if Admin put it on won't affect us at all
Hmmm. You're not seeing it are you. Let me try and put it this way... if the option box being suggested said "we need to see your face before we play" and admin decided that, because of the way you roll, you should have that option box unchecked... would you still be so nonchalant about the idea?
No of course not... because we all need to see people before we play with them right. Well... by the same token... we also all need to "Meet" people before we play... and the OP has suggested a "Social Meets" option. You and I know what the OP means by that option... but most people on this site won't have a clue.. instead they will literally read the words as indicating that you are willing to meet the people you're gonna play with. Thus, in the end you will have effectively unwittingly unchecked a check box that may as well have read "we need to see your face before we play"
Are you getting what I'm saying?"
No.
I am not sure how much I can say I really don't care how anyone else plays or what tick boxes there are as we will find our fun the way we always have as we normally write it on the profile so no one has any doubt before they contact us.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"How do you know what the vast majority of non forum users would assume? Surely you can only speak for your own assumptions? "
I'll stick my hands in the air and confess you're right on that But, as a web developer myself, the golden rule of web development is to imagine the product you're building is gonna be used by a bunch of monkeys rather than rocket scientists. For me, an "I like to meet people" button is the anti-thesis of idiot proof... indeed it is likely to trip up pretty much anybody who hasn't yet conceived of the idea "hey... why don't we make friends with some swingers?" Such an idea may seem obvious to us lot, seeing as we love hanging out on here chatting with each other... but it is kinda unusual for an NSA sex site. I can just see the advert... "New!!! NSA sex... but now with strings attached"
Most people on here just want sex... check out our profile and you'll see we're not one of them... but it does seem that the norm of swinging, if there is such a thing, is not to form relationships with the strangers you're shagging.
Perhaps at the end of all this, then, there should just be a single simple check box for "polyamory"... a tick on which shows that you're open to making friends and possibly even falling in love with the people you swing with. ??? Just a thought |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
My understanding of polyamory is completely different to meeting likeminded people socially and I'm not sure I'd ever make that comparison.
Like I said, we're all different and we all use the site in our own way. I'm all for improvements but equally I'm happy to let people get on with their own way of doing things. Tick a box, don't tick a box. It makes no odds to me. I have my own method which works for me as I'm sure you do too.
I have a number of real lifelong friends from this scene so I'm happy to be sociable with people. I'm certainly not looking for another poly relationship. There's a very big difference between the two in my world. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
This "simple" thread seems to have gotten out of hand, has it not?
As one of the replies said...a new box to either tick or not tick-really not that much of a big deal is it?
If people want it, then add it. Simple. Though I suppose it does beg the question of the process of getting a change done on the site?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
These posts have given me room for thought and ultimately it is fear of rejection that stops me meeting so soon after initial few pleasantries. I would feel on edge that the person may arrive be deciding whether they want to fuck me. I'm a musician but I hate performing to strangers simple fear that it might not be their cup of tea happy amongst those who know and love me. It's never the opposite that I think I might not like them because I try to get all the things out the attracts me to enjoy sex without the natural progression of getting used to it and the sex becoming the best. All these stupid fears stop me meeting at I am consumed with the knowledge that's reason were meeting to judge the goods and I'm putting myself up for sexual judgement whereas in s normal meeting someone naturally yes it's happening by both parties but not quite so formally maybe. I am well aware each to their own and one man's burger is another man's steak so I really do try and find out this type of criteria during conversation to eliminate the fear of rejection. I also well aware I'm not scouting for a partner so no need for romance but somehow with all my past experiences the good ones and real ones have been with friends that iv gotten on really well with in terms of sense of humour even shared music tastes, and just knowing he is a good man would make him sexually attractive to me. I find it odd when someone wants to without even knowing your face or even your name but that's not to say I don't agree with it_my friend has numerous one night stands and loves the sex and I know she gets out of that same as my love of s knowing rythem. I have talkef to a few men that I do start getting that ease that he's gonna like me he's git similar humour etc and then I try and convince him that he probably won't like me or Needing to find that hook of friendship. Funny thing is g is complete opposite he is of the firm belief that whomsoever is lucky to have us there and even though he's aware he may not be ones preferred tipple he just doesn't care. I do try and take that advice and I know I'm an attractive funny person but it defo is my quest because bottom line is love sex would happily do it with all my mates if it wasnt frowned upon by the partners. Equally have decided that I don't tend to have the same silly insecurities if inviting someone to my home it's almost like my house my realm like me or sod off however I can't afford to make an error and invite the ripper over. I appreciate those who have the good grace to show interest someone they intend to penetrate xxx I hope any of you prior suites get back in touch and we can discuss your fave band and thanks to posts as it's been very helpful xxx |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We think it would be useful if 'Social Meets' was a tick option on the Profile Interests section.
There are many swingers who like to meet socially, and indeed some who won't play without first meeting in this way, and we think it would be very helpful if they could search for others who feel the same way. Equally, people who don't like socials could leave the box unticked and thereby indicate that they're not interested..
Anyone agree that it would be useful?"
We like this idea and hope admin can arrange.
We enjoy a good social meet and have had 1 or 2 without even playing. Its nice to meet like minded ppl where you can all talk about likeminded fantasy's.
Go OP
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"a very good idea .we enjoy the social side of swinging as much as the playing "
I think meet in person verification should be split into social meet in person and play meet in person, that would help reduce comments largely from men assuming a woman with a lot of verification plays with each person, when in reality many are social veris only |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Well in addition to our earlier post on this thread: We have just spent an enjoyable, relaxed and civilised social meeting with a young chap we chatted with on here and at the end of the meeting he politely told us that C wasn't for him and that he wasn't interested in taking things any further. Firstly we must applaud this young chap for turning up and secondly for his honesty- it cannot have been easy to say what he did, also can you imagine how uncomfortable it would've been for all concerned if he had come to this conclusion if we'd gone straight to a hotel? Socials don't and won't work for everyone, but a day like today is quite priceless. You can't buy feedback like that! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"a very good idea .we enjoy the social side of swinging as much as the playing
I think meet in person verification should be split into social meet in person and play meet in person, that would help reduce comments largely from men assuming a woman with a lot of verification plays with each person, when in reality many are social veris only"
I hate that idea.
It's got fuck all to do with anyone whether I socialised or fucked someone.
If I met someone specifically for just a coffee and a veri I say that in the veri. Handy being able to insert own text.
A tick box for socials would only work if you were interested in invites to club socials. Men would feel obliged to tick it.
If I ask someone to meet for a coffee and see how we get on and they then push for a private location instead it's useful as a filter
Of the many many changes that have been asked for, for years. This doesn't get my vote |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Well in addition to our earlier post on this thread: We have just spent an enjoyable, relaxed and civilised social meeting with a young chap we chatted with on here and at the end of the meeting he politely told us that C wasn't for him and that he wasn't interested in taking things any further. Firstly we must applaud this young chap for turning up and secondly for his honesty- it cannot have been easy to say what he did, also can you imagine how uncomfortable it would've been for all concerned if he had come to this conclusion if we'd gone straight to a hotel? Socials don't and won't work for everyone, but a day like today is quite priceless. You can't buy feedback like that! "
I wish there was a clapping hands round of applause emoji.
I'd have just typed it, lots.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
