FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > It's the understanding of consent thread
It's the understanding of consent thread
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Consent is never implied Consent should always be sought" Absolutely. | |||
 | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr " You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters  | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters "So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes | |||
| |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes "Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids "Sadly we can't use filters to know the difference between a face and a ball sack. So blocking site images means we can't see faces. And we like faces if debating a meet | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids "Hopefully fab won’t be closed down. As it won’t be easy to monitor I’m sure. | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids
Hopefully fab won’t be closed down. As it won’t be easy to monitor I’m sure. "really you think that could happen, the sex industry is such a big money making racket and the government benefits from this in its taxes, i personally feel that the open minded people of fab will allow it to continue and those that have a preference can use the filters | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids
Hopefully fab won’t be closed down. As it won’t be easy to monitor I’m sure. really you think that could happen, the sex industry is such a big money making racket and the government benefits from this in its taxes, i personally feel that the open minded people of fab will allow it to continue and those that have a preference can use the filters "I just think if people start reporting every dick pic and threatening legal action etc it could end up being more hassle for the owners than it’s worth. Unless they come up with some way around it, a disclaimer or something. | |||
| |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids
Hopefully fab won’t be closed down. As it won’t be easy to monitor I’m sure. really you think that could happen, the sex industry is such a big money making racket and the government benefits from this in its taxes, i personally feel that the open minded people of fab will allow it to continue and those that have a preference can use the filters
I just think if people start reporting every dick pic and threatening legal action etc it could end up being more hassle for the owners than it’s worth. Unless they come up with some way around it, a disclaimer or something. "agreed  | |||
| |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids
Hopefully fab won’t be closed down. As it won’t be easy to monitor I’m sure. really you think that could happen, the sex industry is such a big money making racket and the government benefits from this in its taxes, i personally feel that the open minded people of fab will allow it to continue and those that have a preference can use the filters
I just think if people start reporting every dick pic and threatening legal action etc it could end up being more hassle for the owners than it’s worth. Unless they come up with some way around it, a disclaimer or something. "There is no disclaimer that would void the law. There are however measures that could be put on place - a section on a profile where we could state happy to receive illicit images/not happy to. Screen for sexual content in 1st messages. Or the really easy one ask before flashing. Mrs | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids
Hopefully fab won’t be closed down. As it won’t be easy to monitor I’m sure. really you think that could happen, the sex industry is such a big money making racket and the government benefits from this in its taxes, i personally feel that the open minded people of fab will allow it to continue and those that have a preference can use the filters
I just think if people start reporting every dick pic and threatening legal action etc it could end up being more hassle for the owners than it’s worth. Unless they come up with some way around it, a disclaimer or something.
There is no disclaimer that would void the law.
There are however measures that could be put on place - a section on a profile where we could state happy to receive illicit images/not happy to.
Screen for sexual content in 1st messages.
Or the really easy one ask before flashing.
Mrs "I just don’t see it working. People will still do it. What happens when? Arrests? Courts? Will they really want all that as a business. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids
Hopefully fab won’t be closed down. As it won’t be easy to monitor I’m sure. really you think that could happen, the sex industry is such a big money making racket and the government benefits from this in its taxes, i personally feel that the open minded people of fab will allow it to continue and those that have a preference can use the filters
I just think if people start reporting every dick pic and threatening legal action etc it could end up being more hassle for the owners than it’s worth. Unless they come up with some way around it, a disclaimer or something. "I can see fab having a tick this box to agree to new terms and conditions with a warning about sending pictures and legal action or removing the option of sending pics altogether | |||
| |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids
Hopefully fab won’t be closed down. As it won’t be easy to monitor I’m sure. really you think that could happen, the sex industry is such a big money making racket and the government benefits from this in its taxes, i personally feel that the open minded people of fab will allow it to continue and those that have a preference can use the filters
I just think if people start reporting every dick pic and threatening legal action etc it could end up being more hassle for the owners than it’s worth. Unless they come up with some way around it, a disclaimer or something.
There is no disclaimer that would void the law.
There are however measures that could be put on place - a section on a profile where we could state happy to receive illicit images/not happy to.
Screen for sexual content in 1st messages.
Or the really easy one ask before flashing.
Mrs
I just don’t see it working. People will still do it. What happens when? Arrests? Courts? Will they really want all that as a business. "There are plenty of measures that could be put in place so people wouldn't have to report. But if people felt the need I'd encourage them to do so, just because some don't care doesn't mean all think the same. The lack of consent is appalling. Those that keep saying about the terms and conditions on here they stipulate to use within the UK laws, not to send images that go against UK law. Cyber flashing is a UK law, anyone who thinks these sites fall out of jurisdiction are very mistaken. 9. Acceptable use of our Service You agree that you will not in connection with the Service: a) engage in any activity that breaks the law b) publish or send any Content (including links or references to other content), or otherwise behave in a manner, which: * is unlawful (including depicting or suggesting unlawful acts), defamatory, threatening, harassing, invasive of privacy, racist, hateful, discriminatory, misleading, abusive or deceptive; Mrs. | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids
Hopefully fab won’t be closed down. As it won’t be easy to monitor I’m sure. really you think that could happen, the sex industry is such a big money making racket and the government benefits from this in its taxes, i personally feel that the open minded people of fab will allow it to continue and those that have a preference can use the filters
I just think if people start reporting every dick pic and threatening legal action etc it could end up being more hassle for the owners than it’s worth. Unless they come up with some way around it, a disclaimer or something.
I can see fab having a tick this box to agree to new terms and conditions with a warning about sending pictures and legal action or removing the option of sending pics altogether "I think they’ll have to have something. | |||
"Unless the lady says yes, there is no consent "Person, ninja, person | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids
Hopefully fab won’t be closed down. As it won’t be easy to monitor I’m sure. really you think that could happen, the sex industry is such a big money making racket and the government benefits from this in its taxes, i personally feel that the open minded people of fab will allow it to continue and those that have a preference can use the filters
I just think if people start reporting every dick pic and threatening legal action etc it could end up being more hassle for the owners than it’s worth. Unless they come up with some way around it, a disclaimer or something.
There is no disclaimer that would void the law.
There are however measures that could be put on place - a section on a profile where we could state happy to receive illicit images/not happy to.
Screen for sexual content in 1st messages.
Or the really easy one ask before flashing.
Mrs
I just don’t see it working. People will still do it. What happens when? Arrests? Courts? Will they really want all that as a business.
There are plenty of measures that could be put in place so people wouldn't have to report.
But if people felt the need I'd encourage them to do so, just because some don't care doesn't mean all think the same.
The lack of consent is appalling.
Those that keep saying about the terms and conditions on here they stipulate to use within the UK laws, not to send images that go against UK law.
Cyber flashing is a UK law, anyone who thinks these sites fall out of jurisdiction are very mistaken.
9. Acceptable use of our Service
You agree that you will not in connection with the Service:
a) engage in any activity that breaks the law
b) publish or send any Content (including links or references to other content), or otherwise behave in a manner, which:
* is unlawful (including depicting or suggesting unlawful acts), defamatory, threatening, harassing, invasive of privacy, racist, hateful, discriminatory, misleading, abusive or deceptive;
Mrs."I’m not disagreeing with you. | |||
"Unless the lady says yes, there is no consent "See it's easy. Mrs | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids
Hopefully fab won’t be closed down. As it won’t be easy to monitor I’m sure. really you think that could happen, the sex industry is such a big money making racket and the government benefits from this in its taxes, i personally feel that the open minded people of fab will allow it to continue and those that have a preference can use the filters
I just think if people start reporting every dick pic and threatening legal action etc it could end up being more hassle for the owners than it’s worth. Unless they come up with some way around it, a disclaimer or something.
There is no disclaimer that would void the law.
There are however measures that could be put on place - a section on a profile where we could state happy to receive illicit images/not happy to.
Screen for sexual content in 1st messages.
Or the really easy one ask before flashing.
Mrs
I just don’t see it working. People will still do it. What happens when? Arrests? Courts? Will they really want all that as a business.
There are plenty of measures that could be put in place so people wouldn't have to report.
But if people felt the need I'd encourage them to do so, just because some don't care doesn't mean all think the same.
The lack of consent is appalling.
Those that keep saying about the terms and conditions on here they stipulate to use within the UK laws, not to send images that go against UK law.
Cyber flashing is a UK law, anyone who thinks these sites fall out of jurisdiction are very mistaken.
9. Acceptable use of our Service
You agree that you will not in connection with the Service:
a) engage in any activity that breaks the law
b) publish or send any Content (including links or references to other content), or otherwise behave in a manner, which:
* is unlawful (including depicting or suggesting unlawful acts), defamatory, threatening, harassing, invasive of privacy, racist, hateful, discriminatory, misleading, abusive or deceptive;
Mrs.
I’m not disagreeing with you. "Sorry I was replying as a whole, not against you. Mrs | |||
| |||
| |||
"It can’t be legally given if you’ve had a few Make sure to do a breathalyser on him before sending that pic of your fanny "Just putting the wine down.... | |||
"No is a no I’m not sure is a no No reply is a no I’ll think about it is a no Maybe is a no Another time is a no Yes is yes Simple really. " This! I wish men would understand! | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids
Hopefully fab won’t be closed down. As it won’t be easy to monitor I’m sure. really you think that could happen, the sex industry is such a big money making racket and the government benefits from this in its taxes, i personally feel that the open minded people of fab will allow it to continue and those that have a preference can use the filters
I just think if people start reporting every dick pic and threatening legal action etc it could end up being more hassle for the owners than it’s worth. Unless they come up with some way around it, a disclaimer or something.
There is no disclaimer that would void the law.
There are however measures that could be put on place - a section on a profile where we could state happy to receive illicit images/not happy to.
Screen for sexual content in 1st messages.
Or the really easy one ask before flashing.
Mrs
I just don’t see it working. People will still do it. What happens when? Arrests? Courts? Will they really want all that as a business.
There are plenty of measures that could be put in place so people wouldn't have to report.
But if people felt the need I'd encourage them to do so, just because some don't care doesn't mean all think the same.
The lack of consent is appalling.
Those that keep saying about the terms and conditions on here they stipulate to use within the UK laws, not to send images that go against UK law.
Cyber flashing is a UK law, anyone who thinks these sites fall out of jurisdiction are very mistaken.
9. Acceptable use of our Service
You agree that you will not in connection with the Service:
a) engage in any activity that breaks the law
b) publish or send any Content (including links or references to other content), or otherwise behave in a manner, which:
* is unlawful (including depicting or suggesting unlawful acts), defamatory, threatening, harassing, invasive of privacy, racist, hateful, discriminatory, misleading, abusive or deceptive;
Mrs."The last thing fab will want is to be mentioned in courts or the papers so will either remove the sending pics option or put the onus back to you, something like " By clicking this you may see a sexual image" | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids
Hopefully fab won’t be closed down. As it won’t be easy to monitor I’m sure. really you think that could happen, the sex industry is such a big money making racket and the government benefits from this in its taxes, i personally feel that the open minded people of fab will allow it to continue and those that have a preference can use the filters
I just think if people start reporting every dick pic and threatening legal action etc it could end up being more hassle for the owners than it’s worth. Unless they come up with some way around it, a disclaimer or something.
There is no disclaimer that would void the law.
There are however measures that could be put on place - a section on a profile where we could state happy to receive illicit images/not happy to.
Screen for sexual content in 1st messages.
Or the really easy one ask before flashing.
Mrs
I just don’t see it working. People will still do it. What happens when? Arrests? Courts? Will they really want all that as a business.
There are plenty of measures that could be put in place so people wouldn't have to report.
But if people felt the need I'd encourage them to do so, just because some don't care doesn't mean all think the same.
The lack of consent is appalling.
Those that keep saying about the terms and conditions on here they stipulate to use within the UK laws, not to send images that go against UK law.
Cyber flashing is a UK law, anyone who thinks these sites fall out of jurisdiction are very mistaken.
9. Acceptable use of our Service
You agree that you will not in connection with the Service:
a) engage in any activity that breaks the law
b) publish or send any Content (including links or references to other content), or otherwise behave in a manner, which:
* is unlawful (including depicting or suggesting unlawful acts), defamatory, threatening, harassing, invasive of privacy, racist, hateful, discriminatory, misleading, abusive or deceptive;
Mrs.
The last thing fab will want is to be mentioned in courts or the papers so will either remove the sending pics option or put the onus back to you, something like " By clicking this you may see a sexual image" "Exactly. This is what I was meaning. So something will be done for sure. | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids
Hopefully fab won’t be closed down. As it won’t be easy to monitor I’m sure. really you think that could happen, the sex industry is such a big money making racket and the government benefits from this in its taxes, i personally feel that the open minded people of fab will allow it to continue and those that have a preference can use the filters
I just think if people start reporting every dick pic and threatening legal action etc it could end up being more hassle for the owners than it’s worth. Unless they come up with some way around it, a disclaimer or something.
There is no disclaimer that would void the law.
There are however measures that could be put on place - a section on a profile where we could state happy to receive illicit images/not happy to.
Screen for sexual content in 1st messages.
Or the really easy one ask before flashing.
Mrs
I just don’t see it working. People will still do it. What happens when? Arrests? Courts? Will they really want all that as a business.
There are plenty of measures that could be put in place so people wouldn't have to report.
But if people felt the need I'd encourage them to do so, just because some don't care doesn't mean all think the same.
The lack of consent is appalling.
Those that keep saying about the terms and conditions on here they stipulate to use within the UK laws, not to send images that go against UK law.
Cyber flashing is a UK law, anyone who thinks these sites fall out of jurisdiction are very mistaken.
9. Acceptable use of our Service
You agree that you will not in connection with the Service:
a) engage in any activity that breaks the law
b) publish or send any Content (including links or references to other content), or otherwise behave in a manner, which:
* is unlawful (including depicting or suggesting unlawful acts), defamatory, threatening, harassing, invasive of privacy, racist, hateful, discriminatory, misleading, abusive or deceptive;
Mrs.
The last thing fab will want is to be mentioned in courts or the papers so will either remove the sending pics option or put the onus back to you, something like " By clicking this you may see a sexual image" "It would be a good option to have it on everyone's profile like where you select your preferences I consent to illicit images/I do not consent to illicit images - and not allow a photo on 1st message for the latter. Mrs | |||
"No is a no I’m not sure is a no No reply is a no I’ll think about it is a no Maybe is a no Another time is a no Yes is yes Simple really. This! I wish men would understand!" I’ve never met a man who didn’t understand that. Or are you referring to random messages on here? | |||
| |||
"If this is the end of pretty penis pics I'm gonna be really annoyed. " What if I bombarded you with pretty vag instead? Is that ok? Mrs | |||
| |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids
Hopefully fab won’t be closed down. As it won’t be easy to monitor I’m sure. really you think that could happen, the sex industry is such a big money making racket and the government benefits from this in its taxes, i personally feel that the open minded people of fab will allow it to continue and those that have a preference can use the filters
I just think if people start reporting every dick pic and threatening legal action etc it could end up being more hassle for the owners than it’s worth. Unless they come up with some way around it, a disclaimer or something.
There is no disclaimer that would void the law.
There are however measures that could be put on place - a section on a profile where we could state happy to receive illicit images/not happy to.
Screen for sexual content in 1st messages.
Or the really easy one ask before flashing.
Mrs
I just don’t see it working. People will still do it. What happens when? Arrests? Courts? Will they really want all that as a business.
There are plenty of measures that could be put in place so people wouldn't have to report.
But if people felt the need I'd encourage them to do so, just because some don't care doesn't mean all think the same.
The lack of consent is appalling.
Those that keep saying about the terms and conditions on here they stipulate to use within the UK laws, not to send images that go against UK law.
Cyber flashing is a UK law, anyone who thinks these sites fall out of jurisdiction are very mistaken.
9. Acceptable use of our Service
You agree that you will not in connection with the Service:
a) engage in any activity that breaks the law
b) publish or send any Content (including links or references to other content), or otherwise behave in a manner, which:
* is unlawful (including depicting or suggesting unlawful acts), defamatory, threatening, harassing, invasive of privacy, racist, hateful, discriminatory, misleading, abusive or deceptive;
Mrs.
The last thing fab will want is to be mentioned in courts or the papers so will either remove the sending pics option or put the onus back to you, something like " By clicking this you may see a sexual image"
Exactly. This is what I was meaning. So something will be done for sure. "yes a bit like the signs on nudist beaches | |||
"If this is the end of pretty penis pics I'm gonna be really annoyed. " The boing better not have to go! | |||
"If this is the end of pretty penis pics I'm gonna be really annoyed. What if I bombarded you with pretty vag instead? Is that ok? Mrs " I have women and couples blocked. But I wouldn't be that offended though. | |||
"If this is the end of pretty penis pics I'm gonna be really annoyed. The boing better not have to go!" especially if the buttons are included | |||
"If this is the end of pretty penis pics I'm gonna be really annoyed. The boing better not have to go!especially if the buttons are included "Took me a while to click there  | |||
"If this is the end of pretty penis pics I'm gonna be really annoyed. The boing better not have to go!especially if the buttons are included
Took me a while to click there "lol no means no | |||
| |||
"I can't believe we have to come up with system solutions that it's highly unlikely fab will implement, all because some people get off on flashing without consent. Why are we accommodating bad behaviour & a lack of consent or consideration for others with system blocks as well as penalising decent people from messaging/ talking to new people, because of the poor behaviour of the few? Being on an adult site where people can come together consensually, doesn't negate what is acceptable behaviour to strangers. Some people like being called names, does that mean everyone has to accept name calling just be case we are here ? No - the logic doesn't apply, & the law is the law to protect people - not just a preference offense. If it's not acceptable in person to a stranger, it's not acceptable here to a stranger." By extension, does that mean you'll expect people to use the law to take measures if it happens to them? | |||
"I can't believe we have to come up with system solutions that it's highly unlikely fab will implement, all because some people get off on flashing without consent. Why are we accommodating bad behaviour & a lack of consent or consideration for others with system blocks as well as penalising decent people from messaging/ talking to new people, because of the poor behaviour of the few? Being on an adult site where people can come together consensually, doesn't negate what is acceptable behaviour to strangers. Some people like being called names, does that mean everyone has to accept name calling just be case we are here ? No - the logic doesn't apply, & the law is the law to protect people - not just a preference offense. If it's not acceptable in person to a stranger, it's not acceptable here to a stranger. By extension, does that mean you'll expect people to use the law to take measures if it happens to them?" I expect people to respect others & don't flash without consent. Beyond that I don't have any expectations, people who are the victims of offences have the right to decide if they wish to report it or not. | |||
" There are however measures that could be put on place - a section on a profile where we could state happy to receive illicit images/not happy to. Screen for sexual content in 1st messages. Or the really easy one ask before flashing. Mrs I just don’t see it working. People will still do it. What happens when? Arrests? Courts? Will they really want all that as a business. There are plenty of measures that could be put in place so people wouldn't have to report. But if people felt the need I'd encourage them to do so, just because some don't care doesn't mean all think the same. The lack of consent is appalling. Those that keep saying about the terms and conditions on here they stipulate to use within the UK laws, not to send images that go against UK law. Cyber flashing is a UK law, anyone who thinks these sites fall out of jurisdiction are very mistaken. 9. Acceptable use of our Service You agree that you will not in connection with the Service: a) engage in any activity that breaks the law b) publish or send any Content (including links or references to other content), or otherwise behave in a manner, which: * is unlawful (including depicting or suggesting unlawful acts), defamatory, threatening, harassing, invasive of privacy, racist, hateful, discriminatory, misleading, abusive or deceptive; Mrs. The last thing fab will want is to be mentioned in courts or the papers so will either remove the sending pics option or put the onus back to you, something like " By clicking this you may see a sexual image" It would be a good option to have it on everyone's profile like where you select your preferences I consent to illicit images/I do not consent to illicit images - and not allow a photo on 1st message for the latter. Mrs " I've now written this on my profile... I do not consent. Still getting dick pics. They really need to do something. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters "Doesn't understand consent - instant block  | |||
| |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
Doesn't understand consent - instant block "I don't have to understand it because i would never send an explicit vid or pic, you're on a sex site as I've said set your filters so they can't send them and write it on your profile, maybe the site could actually stop the sending of these pics and vids unless you agree to them being sent. I know that no means no and i read profiles so I'm thoughtful about people but you carry on blocking it doesn't bother me | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids "Fab is not a sex site. It's a swinging site. There is a difference | |||
"No is a no I’m not sure is a no No reply is a no I’ll think about it is a no Maybe is a no Another time is a no Yes is yes Simple really. This! I wish men would understand!" Actualoy, some of us do | |||
| |||
"Whether it's tea or sex You say: “Hey, would you like a cup of tea?” If they say, “Yes, I would love a cup of tea! Thank you!” then you know they want a cup of tea. If you say “Hey, would you like a cup of tea?” and they um and ah and say, “I’m not really sure,” then you can make them a cup of tea or not, but be aware that they might not drink it. If they don’t drink it—and this is the important bit—then don’t make them drink it. You can’t blame them for the fact that you went to the effort of making tea, on the off-chance they wanted it. You just have to deal with them not drinking it; you making tea doesn’t mean that you are entitled to watch them drink it. And if they say, “No thank you,” then don’t make them tea. At all. Don’t make them tea; don’t make them drink tea; don’t get annoyed at them for not wanting tea. They just don’t want tea, ok They might say, “Yes please, that’s kind of you.” And then when the tea arrives, they might not want the tea at all. Sure, that’s annoying, as you’ve already made the tea, but they remain under no obligation to drink the tea. They did want tea, now they don’t. Sometimes people change their mind in the time it takes to boil that kettle, brew the tea and add the milk. And it’s ok for people to change their mind. You are still not entitled to watch them drink it. If they are unresponsive, don’t make them tea. Unresponsive people don’t want tea and can’t answer the question, “Do you want tea?” because they are unresponsive They may have been responsive when you asked them if they wanted tea, and they said yes. But in the time it took you to boil that kettle, brew the tea and add the milk, they are now unresponsive You should just put the tea down, make sure the unresponsive person is safe, and—this is the important bit—don’t make them drink the tea. They said yes then, sure, but unresponsive people don’t want tea If someone said “yes” to tea around your house last Saturday, that doesn’t mean that they want you to make them tea all the time. They don’t want you to come around unexpectedly to their place and make them tea and force them to drink it, while you say “But you wanted tea last week!” They don’t want to wake up to find you pouring tea down their throat, saying “But you wanted tea last night!” Is this a stupid analogy? Yes, you know this already—of course, you wouldn’t force someone to drink tea because they said yes to a cup last week. Of course, you wouldn’t pour tea down the throat of an unconcious person just because they said yes to tea 5 minutes ago. But if you can understand how completely ludicrous it is to force people to have tea when they don’t want tea, and you are able to understand when people don’t want tea, then how hard is it to understand when it comes to sex Just about says it all" CTRL C CTRL V | |||
"Whether it's tea or sex You say: “Hey, would you like a cup of tea?” If they say, “Yes, I would love a cup of tea! Thank you!” then you know they want a cup of tea. If you say “Hey, would you like a cup of tea?” and they um and ah and say, “I’m not really sure,” then you can make them a cup of tea or not, but be aware that they might not drink it. If they don’t drink it—and this is the important bit—then don’t make them drink it. You can’t blame them for the fact that you went to the effort of making tea, on the off-chance they wanted it. You just have to deal with them not drinking it; you making tea doesn’t mean that you are entitled to watch them drink it. And if they say, “No thank you,” then don’t make them tea. At all. Don’t make them tea; don’t make them drink tea; don’t get annoyed at them for not wanting tea. They just don’t want tea, ok They might say, “Yes please, that’s kind of you.” And then when the tea arrives, they might not want the tea at all. Sure, that’s annoying, as you’ve already made the tea, but they remain under no obligation to drink the tea. They did want tea, now they don’t. Sometimes people change their mind in the time it takes to boil that kettle, brew the tea and add the milk. And it’s ok for people to change their mind. You are still not entitled to watch them drink it. If they are unresponsive, don’t make them tea. Unresponsive people don’t want tea and can’t answer the question, “Do you want tea?” because they are unresponsive They may have been responsive when you asked them if they wanted tea, and they said yes. But in the time it took you to boil that kettle, brew the tea and add the milk, they are now unresponsive You should just put the tea down, make sure the unresponsive person is safe, and—this is the important bit—don’t make them drink the tea. They said yes then, sure, but unresponsive people don’t want tea If someone said “yes” to tea around your house last Saturday, that doesn’t mean that they want you to make them tea all the time. They don’t want you to come around unexpectedly to their place and make them tea and force them to drink it, while you say “But you wanted tea last week!” They don’t want to wake up to find you pouring tea down their throat, saying “But you wanted tea last night!” Is this a stupid analogy? Yes, you know this already—of course, you wouldn’t force someone to drink tea because they said yes to a cup last week. Of course, you wouldn’t pour tea down the throat of an unconcious person just because they said yes to tea 5 minutes ago. But if you can understand how completely ludicrous it is to force people to have tea when they don’t want tea, and you are able to understand when people don’t want tea, then how hard is it to understand when it comes to sex Just about says it all" This is why I drink coffee. | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr You have to be open minded on a sex site, in person yes means yes and no means no pretty clear I'd say other than that use the site filters
So in your opinion, We can say no online, and others can ignore our wishes Did i say that, no i didn't but what i did say was in person no means no and the site filters are their to stop unsolicited pics and vids, why do you think the site admin doesn't want to get involved, its a sex site and you have the settings to stop such pics and vids
Fab is not a sex site. It's a swinging site. There is a difference"swinging involves sex lots of it and with multiple partners and kinks | |||
"No is a no I’m not sure is a no No reply is a no I’ll think about it is a no Maybe is a no Another time is a no Yes is yes Simple really. This! I wish men would understand! I’ve never met a man who didn’t understand that. Or are you referring to random messages on here? " Then you have been very lucky. | |||
"No is a no I’m not sure is a no No reply is a no I’ll think about it is a no Maybe is a no Another time is a no Yes is yes Simple really. This! I wish men would understand! I’ve never met a man who didn’t understand that. Or are you referring to random messages on here? Then you have been very lucky. " No | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"No is a no I’m not sure is a no No reply is a no I’ll think about it is a no Maybe is a no Another time is a no Yes is yes Simple really. This! I wish men would understand! I’ve never met a man who didn’t understand that. Or are you referring to random messages on here? Then you have been very lucky. No" I don’t understand? You haven’t been lucky? Most women I know have encountered men who don’t understand the meaning of the word no. Or have I misunderstood? | |||
"Unless the lady says yes, there is no consent
See it's easy.
Mrs "*unless the person says yes. There’s no gender in consent giving | |||
"I can't believe we have to come up with system solutions that it's highly unlikely fab will implement, all because some people get off on flashing without consent. Why are we accommodating bad behaviour & a lack of consent or consideration for others with system blocks as well as penalising decent people from messaging/ talking to new people, because of the poor behaviour of the few? Being on an adult site where people can come together consensually, doesn't negate what is acceptable behaviour to strangers. Some people like being called names, does that mean everyone has to accept name calling just be case we are here ? No - the logic doesn't apply, & the law is the law to protect people - not just a preference offense. If it's not acceptable in person to a stranger, it's not acceptable here to a stranger." Absolutely | |||
| |||
"also none under age of 18 can give consent" I'm pretty sure 16 is the age of consent across the UK? Gbat | |||
"also none under age of 18 can give consent I'm pretty sure 16 is the age of consent across the UK? Gbat " true but I have kids who are 14 and 15 and I wouldn't sleep with people who are my kids classmates so u get me 18 my limit and some my family are saying it should be 25 or 21 least qnd aim up never down | |||
| |||
"There should always be a conversation with anything you have not done together. Sometimes body language says everything. " true but also if u asked one sentence ie do u wanna have sex u don't need body language think of it like the yes is the ultimate confession unless the yes becomes a no then its always no at no point can a no be a yes not benefit if they end up saying yes after repeated no | |||
"There should always be a conversation with anything you have not done together. Sometimes body language says everything. true but also if u asked one sentence ie do u wanna have sex u don't need body language think of it like the yes is the ultimate confession unless the yes becomes a no then its always no at no point can a no be a yes not benefit if they end up saying yes after repeated no " Totally agree with you. | |||
"also none under age of 18 can give consent I'm pretty sure 16 is the age of consent across the UK? Gbat " Correct . Except the age to drink alcohol yes in bar etc . Is 18. So if person either younger or over 18. Is intoxicated and says no. So no consent. I was with a female friend not long before Christmas. She had had a lot to drink. I Stopped from going too far with her. She did not say no . She asked me why couple days later why not ended up in bed. Said to her yes wanted to. But as knew she had a lot to drink . Would not do. She messaged back saying thanks for not happening. Also want to do if both know what is going to happen. So consent is required at all times ? | |||
"also none under age of 18 can give consent I'm pretty sure 16 is the age of consent across the UK? Gbat Correct . Except the age to drink alcohol yes in bar etc . Is 18. So if person either younger or over 18. Is intoxicated and says no. So no consent. I was with a female friend not long before Christmas. She had had a lot to drink. I Stopped from going too far with her. She did not say no . She asked me why couple days later why not ended up in bed. Said to her yes wanted to. But as knew she had a lot to drink . Would not do. She messaged back saying thanks for not happening. Also want to do if both know what is going to happen. So consent is required at all times ? " yes if its not a rapist could just use the same forms of excuses such as body language and provactavity of the clothes etc when in reality no sexual acts should happen unless you ask do you want to a nod of head or yes is enough to clear you of most wrong doing but without that its defo r word terrotory as if u adhear to letter of law consent must be given and how do u get consent via asking and reciveing its just simple and as u said in long run the women who are turn down understand qnd thank you for saying no | |||
| |||
| |||
"If it's not 100% yes, then it's not consent. People may imply it, others may infer it but only when it's communicated as consent, then it has been given " this is exactly what I tryed to mean and you can't get 100yed without communicating it and getting verbal yes back | |||
| |||
"If it's not 100% yes, then it's not consent. People may imply it, others may infer it but only when it's communicated as consent, then it has been given this is exactly what I tryed to mean and you can't get 100yed without communicating it and getting verbal yes back" In my previous post. Yes female said something to me which was at time was not like her . Which made me stop very quick. Although she did not want to. Most ‘males’ ? Would have not bothered , carried on . So consent can be difficult to prove ? But if any doubt or yes lot of alcohol involved then stop . Yes easy to say. ? Perhaps if at time not easy to do as not thinking ? | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr " If we are still talking about losing consent by joining in… ie - from the other thread about dick pic/videos. Etc. I was in vegas, and walked past a couple of topples showgirls outside a casino, and I covered up my 10yr olds eyes (for comedy value) as I walked past. They laughed and said “you’re in vegas baby!!” So that your argument of ‘giving consent by being there’ to see that type of thing. I dunno if it’s right or wrong, but it exists. Or are we talking about consent for sex. ? Because someone should absolutely know when they have given consent. And if you don’t know, it’s a fucking no! | |||
| |||
"I had to have this conversation on my very first fab meet 8 years ago. I met a woman socially twice and we discussed taking things further and agreed to meet in an hotel. Shortly after getting undressed she punched me full in the face without warning. Her reason for doing so was that she wanted me to retaliate in kind as that was her kink. She had never mentioned this before and if she had I would not have met her again. I told her she had picked the wrong guy and how wrong it was that she just assumed I would be ok with it. She apologised profusely and we talked it through or so I thought. A short while later as I came out of the bathroom she drove her knee into my balls and dared me to do something about it. I did. I got dressed and left her there and left the site a few days later thinking everyone here was a fruitcake and had no interest in consent. I can only imagine the consequences if I had initiated any of that or retaliated as she wanted me to. It's one of the main reasons I rarely meet even now and I don't meet without chatting for weeks or months so that I am not caught out like that again." That is horrendous. There are definitely lots of reckless people here, male & female. I'm surprised you ever came back after that. | |||
"also none under age of 18 can give consent I'm pretty sure 16 is the age of consent across the UK? Gbat Correct . Except the age to drink alcohol yes in bar etc . Is 18. So if person either younger or over 18. Is intoxicated and says no. So no consent. " I don't understand why your mixing the two things up? One poster said no one under 18 can consent. I pointed out it's 16. Now you're telling me it's 18 to drink in a bar. I also know that. Then you say if a d*unk person says no, it means no. I also know that. What's d*unkeness got to do with the AGE of consent? I'm not following your point. Gbat | |||
"I had to have this conversation on my very first fab meet 8 years ago. I met a woman socially twice and we discussed taking things further and agreed to meet in an hotel. Shortly after getting undressed she punched me full in the face without warning. Her reason for doing so was that she wanted me to retaliate in kind as that was her kink. She had never mentioned this before and if she had I would not have met her again. I told her she had picked the wrong guy and how wrong it was that she just assumed I would be ok with it. She apologised profusely and we talked it through or so I thought. A short while later as I came out of the bathroom she drove her knee into my balls and dared me to do something about it. I did. I got dressed and left her there and left the site a few days later thinking everyone here was a fruitcake and had no interest in consent. I can only imagine the consequences if I had initiated any of that or retaliated as she wanted me to. It's one of the main reasons I rarely meet even now and I don't meet without chatting for weeks or months so that I am not caught out like that again." wow  | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr If we are still talking about losing consent by joining in… ie - from the other thread about dick pic/videos. Etc. I was in vegas, and walked past a couple of topples showgirls outside a casino, and I covered up my 10yr olds eyes (for comedy value) as I walked past. They laughed and said “you’re in vegas baby!!” So that your argument of ‘giving consent by being there’ to see that type of thing. I dunno if it’s right or wrong, but it exists. Or are we talking about consent for sex. ? Because someone should absolutely know when they have given consent. And if you don’t know, it’s a fucking no! " but a fucking no must surely be a yes | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr If we are still talking about losing consent by joining in… ie - from the other thread about dick pic/videos. Etc. I was in vegas, and walked past a couple of topples showgirls outside a casino, and I covered up my 10yr olds eyes (for comedy value) as I walked past. They laughed and said “you’re in vegas baby!!” So that your argument of ‘giving consent by being there’ to see that type of thing. I dunno if it’s right or wrong, but it exists. Or are we talking about consent for sex. ? Because someone should absolutely know when they have given consent. And if you don’t know, it’s a fucking no! but a fucking no must surely be a yes "No is my safe word. | |||
"Let's hear the understanding of consent... Is it implied?.. Is it explicit?.. Do we really lose it by simply joining?.. Mr " Consent should always be sought, it is also not something that is permanent. Just because someone consents to something once, it doesn’t mean they always consent to it. Especially if that consent was given to another person. | |||
" Doesn't understand consent - instant block
I don't have to understand it"Doesn't have to understand consent
That is one massive red flag you are waving there. | |||
| |||
| |||
"The increasingly popular idea that you can withdraw consent hours, days, weeks or years after an encounter is off the charts for insane, irrational ways of thinking. " Who is this popular with? I'm not sure it's popular at all!? Gbat | |||
| |||
"As for consent in general... Of course you need to get consent for any kind of sexual activity or encounter. Yes ladies, you too! (Assuming all men are constantly up for any sexual activity because they're men is pretty fucked up.) However you cannot take back consent after the fact. You can add any point during the process but, until you have withdrawn your consent everything up to that point is concentrual. The increasingly popular idea that you can withdraw consent hours, days, weeks or years after an encounter is off the charts for insane, irrational ways of thinking. " I think these are 2 different issues. 1) Implied vs clear consent. Consent can be implied rather than verbalised but if it isn't a clear, verbal yes, then you could be wrong and the person could turn around after and say they didn't consent and were too fawn/ shocked/ afraid to respond at the time. That's a choice you make to rely on the belief you have implied consent or not, between you both. 2. Consent to receive explicit images here on fab. I don't think it should be fabs' responsibility to censor people who cannot obtain consent prior to sending explicit images (first messages). You might be right that it will continue to be a problem but that doesn't negate the fact People are behaving without consent. The site censoring them enables this behaviour rather than working to reduce it. | |||
"As for consent in general... Of course you need to get consent for any kind of sexual activity or encounter. Yes ladies, you too! (Assuming all men are constantly up for any sexual activity because they're men is pretty fucked up.) However you cannot take back consent after the fact. You can add any point during the process but, until you have withdrawn your consent everything up to that point is concentrual. The increasingly popular idea that you can withdraw consent hours, days, weeks or years after an encounter is off the charts for insane, irrational ways of thinking. I think these are 2 different issues. 1) Implied vs clear consent. Consent can be implied rather than verbalised but if it isn't a clear, verbal yes, then you could be wrong and the person could turn around after and say they didn't consent and were too fawn/ shocked/ afraid to respond at the time. That's a choice you make to rely on the belief you have implied consent or not, between you both. 2. Consent to receive explicit images here on fab. I don't think it should be fabs' responsibility to censor people who cannot obtain consent prior to sending explicit images (first messages). You might be right that it will continue to be a problem but that doesn't negate the fact People are behaving without consent. The site censoring them enables this behaviour rather than working to reduce it. " You can't stop people from being dickheads so, you have to mitigate for their behaviour yourself. Sad I know but, that's reality in almost every aspect of life. | |||
"The increasingly popular idea that you can withdraw consent hours, days, weeks or years after an encounter is off the charts for insane, irrational ways of thinking. Who is this popular with? I'm not sure it's popular at all!? Gbat " It's far more prevalent than you would think and it is the kind of thing that is taught to young girls now when talking about consent. | |||
"As for consent in general... Of course you need to get consent for any kind of sexual activity or encounter. Yes ladies, you too! (Assuming all men are constantly up for any sexual activity because they're men is pretty fucked up.) However you cannot take back consent after the fact. You can add any point during the process but, until you have withdrawn your consent everything up to that point is concentrual. The increasingly popular idea that you can withdraw consent hours, days, weeks or years after an encounter is off the charts for insane, irrational ways of thinking. I think these are 2 different issues. 1) Implied vs clear consent. Consent can be implied rather than verbalised but if it isn't a clear, verbal yes, then you could be wrong and the person could turn around after and say they didn't consent and were too fawn/ shocked/ afraid to respond at the time. That's a choice you make to rely on the belief you have implied consent or not, between you both. 2. Consent to receive explicit images here on fab. I don't think it should be fabs' responsibility to censor people who cannot obtain consent prior to sending explicit images (first messages). You might be right that it will continue to be a problem but that doesn't negate the fact People are behaving without consent. The site censoring them enables this behaviour rather than working to reduce it. You can't stop people from being dickheads so, you have to mitigate for their behaviour yourself. Sad I know but, that's reality in almost every aspect of life." Apply your logic to violence, SA, any other crime, - your saying victims have to just accept it/ nothing to be done? | |||
"The increasingly popular idea that you can withdraw consent hours, days, weeks or years after an encounter is off the charts for insane, irrational ways of thinking. Who is this popular with? I'm not sure it's popular at all!? Gbat It's far more prevalent than you would think and it is the kind of thing that is taught to young girls now when talking about consent." Is that before or after the men sending unsolicited D pics on here and anywhere get an education on what consent is? | |||
"The increasingly popular idea that you can withdraw consent hours, days, weeks or years after an encounter is off the charts for insane, irrational ways of thinking. Who is this popular with? I'm not sure it's popular at all!? Gbat It's far more prevalent than you would think and it is the kind of thing that is taught to young girls now when talking about consent." Yeah, you said it was becoming popular. I'm asking for some real examples. Where is it being taught? Gbat | |||
"No is a no I’m not sure is a no No reply is a no I’ll think about it is a no Maybe is a no Another time is a no Yes is yes Simple really. " This.... Exactly right, it isn't complicated | |||
| |||
"No is a no I’m not sure is a no No reply is a no I’ll think about it is a no Maybe is a no Another time is a no Yes is yes Simple really. This.... Exactly right, it isn't complicated" Well it’s actually a little bit more complicated than that. Absolutely , fuck me right now please ….might also mean no , Under very specific circumstances. Non and Nine also mean no , in French and German. | |||
 mean… I don’t know
;-) means probably yes.
 means yes
 means Hell yes!!
 means why not?
means I don’t know
 means oh no!
means shit no! | |||
| |||
| |||
" Sort of like Twitter and Instagram with their "this image contains adult material. Click to see" kind of thing? Surely that could be done with AI at this point? " This is already being done on another swinging app, albeit badly with regards to censoring women's bodies on public posts. But it is used to recognise and control categories of image. " I just don't think you can stop people from sending and solicited dick pics without really dramatically and negatively affecting this site but" Stopping people sending unsolicited dick pics is a negative thing? Surely any steps taken to prevent people breaking the law with regard to cyber flashing can only improve this site? | |||
" Sort of like Twitter and Instagram with their "this image contains adult material. Click to see" kind of thing? Surely that could be done with AI at this point? This is already being done on another swinging app, albeit badly with regards to censoring women's bodies on public posts. But it is used to recognise and control categories of image. I just don't think you can stop people from sending and solicited dick pics without really dramatically and negatively affecting this site but Stopping people sending unsolicited dick pics is a negative thing? Surely any steps taken to prevent people breaking the law with regard to cyber flashing can only improve this site?" I think the difference is that app is actively trying to prevent cyber flashing and to give people a different experience. They have a few teething issues but they’ve listened to people and are trying to get it right. They also openly communicate with all members on what they are doing and why. I like it. | |||
" Apply your logic to violence, SA, any other crime, - your saying victims have to just accept it/ nothing to be done? " Those victims would surely use the law to have something done. I don't think they'd just appeal to others not to inflict violence or for some other agency to make sure it doesn't happen. | |||
" Apply your logic to violence, SA, any other crime, - your saying victims have to just accept it/ nothing to be done? Those victims would surely use the law to have something done. I don't think they'd just appeal to others not to inflict violence or for some other agency to make sure it doesn't happen. " I agree. I also agree the unsolicited pic thing should be an offence and it is now an offence but to compare a pic,that you’d have to actually click on to see it properly, to someone actually getting it out in the street or somewhere in public is not even comparable. | |||
" Sort of like Twitter and Instagram with their "this image contains adult material. Click to see" kind of thing? Surely that could be done with AI at this point? This is already being done on another swinging app, albeit badly with regards to censoring women's bodies on public posts. But it is used to recognise and control categories of image. I just don't think you can stop people from sending and solicited dick pics without really dramatically and negatively affecting this site but Stopping people sending unsolicited dick pics is a negative thing? Surely any steps taken to prevent people breaking the law with regard to cyber flashing can only improve this site? I think the difference is that app is actively trying to prevent cyber flashing and to give people a different experience. They have a few teething issues but they’ve listened to people and are trying to get it right. They also openly communicate with all members on what they are doing and why. I like it. " We like it too. It's definitely got potential to be a far better experience than fab. As you say the owners willingness to engage is great, but we think there are some issues with the photo guidelines. Allowing male nipples but insisting female ones are covered seems remarkably old fashioned for a lifestyle community app. | |||
" Sort of like Twitter and Instagram with their "this image contains adult material. Click to see" kind of thing? Surely that could be done with AI at this point? This is already being done on another swinging app, albeit badly with regards to censoring women's bodies on public posts. But it is used to recognise and control categories of image. I just don't think you can stop people from sending and solicited dick pics without really dramatically and negatively affecting this site but Stopping people sending unsolicited dick pics is a negative thing? Surely any steps taken to prevent people breaking the law with regard to cyber flashing can only improve this site? I think the difference is that app is actively trying to prevent cyber flashing and to give people a different experience. They have a few teething issues but they’ve listened to people and are trying to get it right. They also openly communicate with all members on what they are doing and why. I like it. We like it too. It's definitely got potential to be a far better experience than fab. As you say the owners willingness to engage is great, but we think there are some issues with the photo guidelines. Allowing male nipples but insisting female ones are covered seems remarkably old fashioned for a lifestyle community app." We don't use other apps so not familiar with the one you describe. However, it sounds badly thought out, if we're back to censoring the female nipple, for heaven's sake. It's bad enough on the likes of Instagram that breastfeeding or things relating to breast cancer treatment get censored. | |||
